I 


THE  I  [BRARY 


THE  UNIVERSITY 


OF  CAL  [FORNIA 


GIFT  OF 


Dr.   Gordon  S.  Watkins 


(Uartom  &  Walking 


THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 

NEW  YOWC  •    BOSTON   •    CHICAGO  I     > 
DALLAS  •  ATLANTA  •   SAN  FRANCISCO 

MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  LnnrKD 

LONDON  •   BOMBAY  •    CALCUTTA 
MELBOURNE 

THE  MACMILLAN  CO.  OP  CANADA.  LID. 

TORONTO 


ID  2 

THE 
LARGER    SOCIALISM 


THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 
1921 

All  right,  reserved 


COPTBIQHT,  1921 , 

BY  THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 
Set  up  and  printed.    Published  May,  1921 


Press  of 

J.  J.  Little  A  Ires  Company 
N»w  York,  U.  B.  A. 


A 

My  Mother 

i  •" 

\  My  Fattier 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 

PAGl 

INTRODUCTION — SOCIALISM  AND  MATERIAL  WEL- 
FARE    1 

CHAPTER 

I.    SOCIALISM  AND  QUALITY  OF  PRODUCTION     .     .  9 

II.    SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    .     .  82 

III.  SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM 67 

IV.  SOCIALISM  AND  THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  95 
V.    THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR 127 

VI.    SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL     .     .     .  161   v 

VII.    SOME    CONSIDERATIONS    CONCERNING    SOCIALIST  / 

POLICY 188 

VIII.    THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM  ....  217      t 


THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 


THE 

LARGER  SOCIALISM 

INTRODUCTION 

SOCIALISM  AND  MATERIAL  WELFARE 

THE  Socialist  remedy  for  the  ills  which  con- 
front society  is,  of  course,  the  public  ownership 
and  the  democratic  management  of  all  industry 
of  social  value.  On  the  whole,  the  answer  is  defi- 
nite and  positive.  True,  the  Socialist  ranks  har- 
hor  various  opinions  as  to  what  constitutes  demo- 
cratic management.  One  camp  maintains  that  the 
socially-valuable  industries,  after  becoming  pub- 
licly-owned, should  bo  operated  by  the  Govern- 
ment. Another  camp,  feeling  more  impellingly 
the  call  of  syndicalism  and  guild  socialism,  would 
have  the  publicly-owned  industries  operated  pri- 
marily by  their  workers.  The  sudden  apparition 
on  the  horizon  of  an  actually-functioning  Soviet 
system  has  caused  within  the  Socialist  citadel  dis- 
agreement also  as  to  whether  the  political  state 
should  be  organized  geographically  or  occupa- 
tionally,  and  as  to  the  method  by  which  Socialism 

1 


2  THE  LAEGEB  SOCIALISM 

can  be  or  should  be  achieved.  Finally,  there  is 
room  for  legitimate  Socialist  disagreement  as  to 
the  gauge  or  gauges  by  which  an  industry  shall 
be  considered  socially-valuable. 

Nevertheless,  in  all  fairness  it  must  be  admitted 
that  these  points  lie  in  the  periphery  and  not  at 
the  hub  of  the  Socialist  wheel.  Concerning  the 
central  conception  of  Socialism,  there  is  sub- 
stantial agreement.  As  at  present  the  national 
Government  owns  and  operates  the  mails,  the 
Panama  Canal,  the  Alaskan  Railroad,  the  army 
and  navy,  the  postal  savings  banks,  the  parcel 
post,  the  Government  Printing  Office,  the  Light- 
house and  Coast  Guard  Services,  the  national 
parks; — as  local  Governments  own  and  operate 
public  schools,  libraries,  the  police  and  fire  depart- 
ments, the  water  supply,  streets  and  bridges, 
roads,  street  illumination,  parks, — so  in  a  Social- 
ist state  4fce  national  Government  and  the  local 
Governments  would  own  and  be  responsible  for 
the  operation  of  the  mines,  the  railroads,  the  iron 
and  steel  mills,  the  steamship  lines,  the  express 
systems,  the  oil  wells,  the  power  plants,  the  cloth- 
ing factories,  the  meat-packing  plants,  the  shoe 
factories,  the  shipping,  the  laundries,  the  commer- 
cial automobile  plants,  the  cotton  and  woolen  mills, 
the  forests,  the  non-agricultural  land,  the  com- 
mercial and  savings  banks,  the  apartment  houses, 
the  grain  elevators,  the  gas  plants,  the  street  rail- 
ways, the  insurance  companies,  the  bakeries,  the 


INTRODUCTION  >        3 

telephone  and  telegraph  systems,  the  cold  stor- 
age plants,  the  department  stores,  the  ice  plants, 
the  agricultural  implements  factories,  the  fertili- 
zer plants,  the  sugar  refineries,  the  paper  mills, 
the  fish-packing  plants,  the  lumber  mills,  the  flour 
mills,  and  all  other  agencies  of  production  and 
distribution  which  cannot  cease  functioning,  or 
cannot  function  badly,  without  inflicting  injury 
upon  the  great  majority  of  the  people.  As  the 
present  national  and  local  Governments  furnish 
mail  service,  education,  water,  and  fire  and  police 
protection  to  the  people  free  or  at  cost,  and  in 
the  amounts  necessary  for  the  people's  welfare, 
Socialist  national  and  local  Governments  would 
furnish  to  the  people  free  or  at  cost,  and  in 
the  amounts  necessary  for  the  people's  welfare, 
coal,  oil,  bread,  meat,  milk,  ice,  clothing,  shoes, 
transportation,  housing,  sewing  machines,  calico, 
blankets,  lumber,  gas  and  electricity  and  "insur- 
ance policies. 

Side  by  side  with  this  collective  ownership  iand 
operation  of  all  necessary  industry,  a  Socialist 
state  would  enforce  extensive  welfare  legislation. 
True,  most  of  this  legislation  can  be  achieved  by 
a  purification  instead  of  by  the  abolition  of  the 
present  capitalist  system,  and  much  of  it  is  advo- 
cated by  ardent  opponents  of  a  Socialist  system. 
But  the  consummation  of  most  of  these  welfare 
proposals  must  be  advocated  by  every  Socialist, 
for  even  to  those  Socialists  who  would  have  the 


4  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

Government  intrude  but  lightly  into  the  actual 
processes  of  production,  much  of  this  protective 
legislation  will  appear  the  sine  qua  non  of  a  suc- 
cessful cooperative  commonwealth.  Among  other 
things,  it  would  include  maternity  insurance,  for 
a  period  before  and  after  childbirth ;  pensions  for 
dependent  mothers;  abolition  of  child  labor,  ex- 
cept possibly  in  abnormal  cases,  below  the  age  of 
eighteen ;  higher  schooling  for  all  showing  mental 
promise,  even  by  the  aid  of  scholarships  for  the 
support  of  the  students  preparing  for  the  more 
advanced  professions,  such  as  medicine ;  extensive 
vocational  guidance;  generally  available  medical 
examinations ;  the  guaranty  to  each  worker  of  at 
least  the  minimum  wage  necessary  for  him  or 
for  his  family  to  maintain  a  socially-useful  stand- 
ard of  living ;  a  maximum  wage  for  even  the  most 
responsible  administrators  of  the  Socialist  state 
and  of  the  Socialist  state's  industries,  dependent 
upon  the  total  wealth  productivity  of  the  state 
and  upon  the  margin  remaining  after  all  had  been 
guaranteed  the  minimum  wage ;  health  insurance ; 
liberal  laws  for  workmen's  compensation  in  all 
industries ;  regulation,  preferably  variable,  of  the 
hours  of  labor  permissible  per  day,  per  week,  per 
year;  liberal  sanitary  and  safety  regulations  for 
all  work,  especially  for  the  more  unhealthful  and 
the  more  dangerous;  high,  if  not  confiscatory, 
taxes  on  the  wealth  descending  from  the  previous 
capitalist  system,  on  inheritances,  on  the  unearned 


INTRODUCTION  5 

increment  in  land  values;  segregation  of  the 
feeble-minded;  insurance  against  whatever  unem- 
ployment might  persist  in  spite  of  wide  regulari- 
zation  of  industry,  against  invalidity,  against  old 
age. 

The  outstanding  virtue  which  most  Socialists 
claim  for  this  program  is  the  abolition  of  the  un~ 
happiness  due  to  the  present  inequitable  distri- 
bution of  material  welfare.  Concerning  the  vir- 
tues of  any  possible  rearrangement  of  society's 
wealth  looking  toward  such  an  end,  there  can  be 
little  dispute.  At  one  end  of  our  social  scale, 
the  few  roll  in  wealth  well-nigh  beyond  even  their 
most  extravagant  desires,  while  at  the  other  end 
the  many  stoop  under  poverty  incapable  of  satis- 
fying even  their  scantiest  demands  for  a  happy 
existence.  At  the  top,  many  are  enabled  to  enjoy 
life  without  performing  irksome  labor,  or  by  per- 
forming labor  of  little  value  to  the  community ; 
and  at  the  bottom,  by  far  the  larger  proportion  of 
mankind  is  compelled  to  toil,  whether  on  farm  or 
in  workshop,  far  beyond  the  point  at  which  toil  is 
satisfying,  or  self -developing,  or  even  socially 
valuable.  Until  the  more  recent  decades,  it  may 
have  been  true  that  production  was  insufficient 
for  an  equitable  system  of  distribution  of  the 
world's  material  goods  to  meet  the  need  of  all; 
but  current  figures  for  the  total  national  income 
of  the  United  States  show  that  the  super-efficient 
machine  production  of  the  twentieth  century 


6  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

would  more  than  suffice  fully  to  pass  material  wel- 
fare around  in  this  country. 

It  is  difficult  to  do  justice  to  the  strength  and 
validity  of  this  indictment  of  our  present  system 
foR  permitting  some  to  eat  cake  while  others  have 
not  bread.  Man  may  not  live  by  bread  alone,  but 
he  lives  by  bread  first;  and  no  civilization  oan  be 
wholesome  until  to  everyone  living  under  it  there 
is  available  a  sufficiency  of  the  goods  which  satisfy 
man's  basic  material  needs.  But  my  purpose  is 
to  insist  that  this  program  can  only  lay  the  foun- 
dation. Unless  there  is  much  building  upon  it, 
the  full  promise  of  Socialism  will  not  be  redeemed. 
A  Socialist  civilization  in  which  the  predominant 
human  type  will  be  the  type  of  fairly  prosperous 
skilled  trade  unionist  most  in  evidence  at  an  an- 
nual convention  of  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor,  for  instance,  will  hardly  repay  the  hopes, 
the  idealism,  the  enthusiasm  and  the  abiding  sac- 
rifices which  have  gone  into  the  Socialist  move- 
ment. The  average  skilled  A.  F.  of  L.  trade  union- 
ist has  by  this  time  so  increased  his  wages  and 
so  decreased  his  labor  that  economically  he  has 
become  no  longer  a  proletarian,  but  a  bourgeois ; 
but  in  the  process  he  has  become  also  intellec- 
tually, socially,  ethically  and  emotionally  a  bour- 
geois. A  society  composed  of  nouveaux  riches 
may  be  a  more  wholesome  organism  than  a  society 
composed  of  even  the  deserving  poor;  but  the  pos- 
sibilities of  the  Cooperative  Commonwealth  far 


INTRODUCTION  7 

exceed  these  of  the  mere  creation  of  nouvelle 
richesse.  Freedom  from  material  want  is  the  ir- 
reducible minimum  for  a  healthy  civilization,  but 
it  must  be  conceived  as  the  means,  not  the  end. 

The  thesis  herein  presented  is  that  if  Socialism 
is  to  benefit  humanity  to  the  full  extent  of  which 
it  is  capable,  it  must  become  a  broader  and  a 
deeper  theory  and  political  movement  than  at 
present  It  must  think  and  talk  less  in  terms  of 
giving  the  worker  the  full  product  of  his  labor, 
and  more  in  terms  of  building  a  richer  culture 
upon  the  foundation  of  material  welfare.  It  must 
establish  a  working  mental  agreement  with  other 
theories  and  movements  which  will  arrive  at 
fruition  after  Socialism,  if  the  Socialist  state  is 
to  be  rich  instead  of  poor  in  the  immaterial  and 
finer  products  of  the  human  mind.  It  must  have 
an  eye,  for  example,  to  the  rights  of  the  individ- 
ual conscience,  as  against  the  custom  of  the  herd ; 
to  the  development  of  individual  and  collective 
mental  independence  and  self-assertiveness ;  to  the 
biological  improvement  of  the  race;  to  the  negro 
problem ;  above  all,  to  the  feminist  movement.  It 
must  become  the  creation  of  the  most  exact- 
ing empirical,  contemporaneous  and  inductive 
thought,  rather  than  of  deductive  and  dogmatic 
dialectics  based  on  thought-systems  deriving  from 
.formulas  wrought  by  past  generations.  It  must 
be  more  deeply  concerned  with  the  quality  than 
with,  the  quantity  of  the  enjoyments  of  life  under 


8  THE  LAEGEB  SOCIALISM 

Socialism,  even  though  it  may  never  lose  sight 
of  the  dependence  of  their  quality  upon  their  quan- 
tity. It  must  ceaselessly  consider  the  nature  of 
the  ideals  which  will  drive  men  forward  in  a  So- 
cialist commonwealth,  with  the  concepts  which  will 
underlie  the  daily  rounds  of  their  existence,  with 
the  power  of  Socialism  to  encourage  the  few  and 
weak  social  impulses  and  to  discourage  the  many 
and  strong  anti-social  impulses  of  which  man  is 
the  combination.  It  must  become  less  Socialistic 
and  more  socialistic.  In  a  word,  a  Socialist  state 
must  ask,  "What  kind  of  man  is  Jones?"  far  more 
anxiously  than  it  will  have  previously  asked, 
>'How  much  does  Jones  earn?" 


CHAPTER  I. 

SOCIALISM    AND   QUALITY    OF   PBODTJOTION. 

THE  first  and  unavoidable  responsibility  of  a 
Socialist  state  thus  would  be  the  improvement  of 
the  material  fortunes  of  the  great  bulk  of  its  sub- 
jects. To  consummate  such  an  improvement,  there 
is  naturally  and  inexorably  demanded  an  ad- 
equate production  of  those  goods  on  which  the 
populace's  material  well-being  depends.  The  first 
issue  at  stake  between  the  capitalist  system  and 
a  socialist  system  hence  becomes  the  issue  of  com- 
parative efficiency  in  producing  essentials. 

One  would  therefore  naturally  expect  a  respect- 
able proportion  of  Socialist  propaganda,  both 
written  and  spoken,  to  concern  itself  with  the 
productive  efficiency  of  a  Socialist  commonwealth. 
True,  it  might  be  objected  that  in  so  far  as  the 
Socialist  movement  holds  hard  and  fast  to  the 
Marxian  analyses,  any  such  concern  would,  be 
largely  superfluous,  if  not  inappropriate.  For 
Marxism  teaches  that  the  replacement  of  the 
capitalist  system  by  the  Socialist  system  is  as  in- 
evitable as  the  replacement  of  the  tadpole  by  the 
frog;  so  that  discussion  of  the  advantages  of 

9 


10  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

Socialism  over  Capitalism,  because  of  the  former's 
greater  productive  efficiency,  might  be  considered 
as  much  beside  the  point  as  discussion  of  the  ad- 
vantages of  frogs  over  tadpoles.  The  prime  duty 
of  a  Marxian  Socialist  movement  from  this  point 
of  view  would  accordingly  seem  to  consist  merely 
in  educating  the  proletariat  to  a  realization  of 
this  inevitability  of  Socialism,  in  preparing  the 
workers  against  the  day  when  they  are  destined 
to  take  over  the  reins  of  government  and  industry, 
and  thus  in  hastening  the  dawn  of,  rather  than  in 
evolving,  the  Cooperative  Commonwealth. 

And  yet  even  in  so  far  as  the  Socialist  movement 
holds  to  the  Marxian  analyses,  it  is  glaringly 
neglectful  of  its  opportunities  if  it  does  not  stress 
the  greater  efficiency  of  Socialism  over  Capitalism 
in  material  production.  It  is  thus  neglectful  in 
both  its  tactics  and  its  thought,  both  as  a  political 
movement  and  as  a  system  of  economic  and  politi- 
cal philosophy.  With  respect  to  its  tactics,  it  ac- 
cepts as  its  duty  and  responsibility  the  education 
of  the  proletariat  to  the  virtues  of  the  Cooper- 
ative Commonwealth.  It  refuses  to  abandon  the 
workers  to  the  mercies  of  whatever  education  they 
might  passively  derive  from  the  mere  flow  of 
events  inevitably  toward  the  Socialist  state.  But 
nothing  could  educate  the  still  uneducated  prole- 
tariat better  than  proof  of  the  greater  material 
productivity  of  Socialism  over  Capitalism.  The 
Marxian  believes  that  man  acts  predominantly 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUALITY  OF  PRODUCTION      11 

from  economic  motives,  so  that  the  most  effective 
method  of  enlisting  the  workers  under  the  red 
flag  would  be  to  persuade  them  that  under  Social- 
ism there  would  be  a  greater  abundance  of  ma- 
terial goods  available  to  them  than  under  Capital- 
ism. If  the  Marxian  insists  that  the  workers  will 
and  must  be  educated  only  through  the  scarcity 
of  the  material  goods  falling  to  their  lot  as  the 
capitalist  system  develops,  the  answer  is  that  the 
workers  can  best  be  made  to  realize  that  scarcity 
by  contrasting  it  with  the  comparative  material 
abundance  to  be  expected  as  a  Socialist  system  de- 
velops. Even  for  a  Marxian  Socialist  movement, 
insistence  upon  the  advantages  of  Socialism  over> 
Capitalism  for  purposes  of  production  thus  woulcf 
be  tactics  as  effective  as  justifiable. 

And  in  thought  and  philosophy,  as  well  as  in 
tactics  and  action,  the  compleat  Marxian,  of  all 
persons,  should  be  eager  to  prove  that  there  would 
be  greater  abundance  of  material  goods  under 
Socialism  than  under  Capitalism.  For  the  key- 
stone of  the  Marxian  arch  is  the  economic  inter- 
pretation of  history.  True,  the  Marxian  interpre- 
tation of  history  is  not  to  be  described  as  a  mere 
assertion  of  the  predominance  of  economic  or 
materialistic  motives  in  human  life.  It  asserts 
rather  that  each  era  of  human  history  centers  in- 
exorably around,  and  takes  its  cultural  tone  pri- 
marily from,  the  method  of  economic  production 
and  distribution  current  in  that  era.  But  cer- 


12  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

tainly  with  such  an  interpretation  of  history  the 
predominance  of  materialistic  motives  is  closely 
connected.  It  may  not  be  logically  connected  as 
an  exact  corollary,  but  it  would  seem  to  be  at 
least  implied,  and  implied  more  than  loosely.  It 
would  seem  difficult  to  maintain  that  each  era  of 
human  history  centers  around  its  method  of  eco- 
nomic production,  and  at  the  same  time  to  deny1 
that  each  era  of  human  history  can  serve  itself 
best  by  adopting  the  method  of  economic  produc- 
tion which  in  that  era  can  most  effectively  meet  the 
demand  for  economic  or  material  goods.  It  is 
inconceivable  that  the  Socialist  commonwealth 
would  supplant  the  capitalist  state  by  the  action 
of  the  working-class  unless  the  working-class  stood 
to  obtain  material  improvement  by  the  change. 
Accordingly,  even  if  the  Socialist  movement 
were  predominantly  under  the  dictation  of  the 
Marxian  analyses,  its  failure  to  concentrate  much, 
if  not  most,  of  its  fire  upon  the  comparative  in- 
efficiency of  capitalist  production  would  still  be 
serious.  But  by  this  day  and  generation,  the 
political  Socialist  movement,  particularly  in  the 
United  States,  has  begun  to  break  with  Marxism 
on  one  point  after  another.  The  1920  Presidential 
platform  of  the  Socialist  Party  of  America,  both 
in  its  statement  of  principles  (program  maximum) 
and  in  its  immediate  demands  (program  mini- 
mum), like  its  Congressional  platform  of  1918,  is 
essentially  revisionist.  That  is  to  say,  it  is  more 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUALITY  OF  PRODUCTION      13 

representative  of  "evolutionary"  than  of  revolu- 
tionary or  Marxian  Socialism.-  Iri  the  more  recent 
decades  since  the  Communist  Manifesto,  the 
Socialist  movement,  as  a  whole,  has  ceased  to 
content  itself  with  the  generally  negative  indict- 
ment of  the  present-day  structure  of  society  which 
is  involved  in  Marxism.  As  a  whole,  the  Socialist 
movement  no  longer  contents  itself  with  indicting 
capitalism  solely  through  the  Marxian  economic 
interpretation  of  history,  explanation  of  crises, 
prophecy  of  the  overwhelmingly  accelerated  con- 
centration of  capital,  forecast  of  the  increasing 
misery  and  pauperization  of  the  workers,  predic- 
tion of  the  ultimate  disappearance  of  the  middle 
class,  class  struggle  doctrine,  labor  theory  of 
value  and  surplus  value  creed.  And  as  reliance 
upon  the  all- sufficiency  of  the  Marxian  analyses 
wanes,  the  importance  of  considerations  of  pro- 
ductivity obviously  waxes  supreme.  Yet  despite 
this  increasingly  evident  unwillingness  to  accept 
Marx  as  the  sum  and  substance  of  the  Law,  the 
delver  into  the  American  Socialist  movement  is 
met  by  much  material  on  the  iniquities  of  Capital- 
ism and  the  virtues  of  Socialism  in  the  distribution 
of  wealth,  but  by  an  astounding  paucity  of  sound 
discussion  as  to  their  comparative  efficiency  in 
the  production  of  wealth.  That  paucity  of  dis- 
cussion is  more  than  astounding;  it  is  illuminat- 
ing. It  irresistibly  inclines  the  observer  to  con- 
clude that  the  Socialist  movement  in  the  United 


14  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

States  has  not  yet  thought  its  problem  through, 
and  has  not  yet  fully  appreciated  the  realities  of 
the  situation  confronting  it. 

For  whether  the  advent  of  Socialism  be  con- 
sidered desirable  because  inevitable  or  inevitable 
because  desirable,  the  Socialist  can  hurl  against 
the  capitalist  system  an  indictment  for  inefficiency 
of  production  which,  if  emphasized  and  reiterated 
as  the  serious  and  fundamental  nature  of  the  in- 
dictment deserves  and  demands,  might  well  prove 
to  be  Socialism's  trump  card.  It  is  initially 
in  the  quality  of  its  output  that  the  capitalist 
system  of  production  is  weak  and  vulnerable.  The 
capitalist  system  does  not  pretend  to  produce  in 
order  to  satisfy  needs;  it  produces  solely  to  ac- 
quire profits.  Where  profits  accompany  the  satis- 
faction of  needs,  well  and  good;  where  no  profits 
accrue  in  satisfying  needs,  very  regrettable,  no 
doubt,  but  irremediable.  The  world  may  suffer 
because  it  has  not  sufficient  houses  and  has  more 
than  sufficient  silk  shirts — the  capitalist  system 
does  not  produce  houses  if  there  be  no  profit  in  the 
production  of  houses,  and  it  continues  to  produce 
silk  shirts  if  there  be  profit  in  the  production  of 
silk  shirts.  Or  even  if  there  be  profit  in  the  pro- 
duction of  houses,  houses  are  not  produced  if  theYe' 
be  greater  profit  in  the  production  of  silk  shirts. 
Similarly,  so  long  as  transportation  is  furnished 
the  nation  according  to  the  possibility  of  profits, 
so  long  will  certain  sections  which  need  railroads 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUALITY  OF  PRODUCTION       15 

be  deprived  of  them — just  as  there  would  be  no 
Eural  Free  Delivery  if  the  Postal  System  were  a 
private  profit-making  and  not  a  public  service-ren- 
dering enterprise.  And  there  is  not  only  the  pro- 
duction of  relatively  unessential  goods  and  the 
lack  of  production  of  essential  goods — there  is 
also  the  production  of  goods  per  se  harmful,  such 
as  patent  medicines,  so  long  as  profit  accrues  to 
them.  Society's  resources  today  are  more  than 
sufficient  to  supply  honey  to  some  after  all  have 
been  supplied  with  milk ;  but  capitalism  so  utilizes 
those  resources  as  to  furnish  honey  as  well  as 
milk  for  some  before  it  furnishes  milk  for  all. 

There  is  not  only  capitalism's  inefficiency  in  the 
kinds  of  commodities  produced;  there  is  also  its 
inefficiency  in  its  effect  upon  most  of  the  human 
beings  producing  under  it.  Unless  prevented  by 
welfare  legislation  or  by  organization  of  the  work- 
ers, it  utilizes  them  in  hours,  kinds  and  surround- 
ing circumstances  of  labor  which  exhaust  their 
energies  prematurely.  Where  the  task  is  of  a 
nature  to  undermine  the  health  of  a  human  being 
engaged  on  it,  although  it  might  be  performed  also 
by  machinery,  the  human  being  is  kept  at  the  task 
whenever  it  is  cheaper  to  use  him  than  to  use  a 
machine.  If  it  be  to  the  material  profit  of  a  steel 
mill  to  work  men  twelve  hours  a  day,  or  in  twenty- 
four  hour  shifts,  or  seven  days  a  week,  in  un- 
skilled labor  where  a  reduction  of  hours  would 
produce  an  increased  output  from  them  relatively, 


16  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

but  a  decreased  output  absolutely,  they  are  so 
worked.  If  workers  can  be  obtained  by  paying 
wages  so  low  as  not  to  provide  them  with  what 
are  generally  considered  the  mere  decencies  of 
life,  they  are  so  paid.  If  our  present  system  of 
production  had  cared  more  deeply  for  the  wel- 
fare of  the  nation  as  a  whole  than  for  the  guaran- 
ty of  profits  to  our  few  owners  of  property,  the 
little  children  of  the  South  would  not  have  waited 
so  long  to  be  freed  from  the  slavery  of  the  cotton- 
mills,  from  which  even  now  some  of  them  have 
not  yet  been  freed.  Likewise,  some  of  the  horrors 
and  the  danger  to  our  entire  national  stability 
from  our  negro  problem  would  have  been  obviated 
by  a  greater  willingness  to  provide  respectable 
educational  facilities  for  the  negroes  below  the 
Mason  and  Dixon  Line ;  more  generously  to  train 
them  in  and  to  provide  them  with  methods  of  earn- 
ing a  livelihood  better  than  those  now  open  to 
them ;  and  to  remove  from  them  many  of  the  politi- 
cal and  trade-union  disabilities  which  make  their 
present  economic  exploitation  possible. 

Even  if  the  worker  be  regarded  merely  as  a 
factor  in  production  and  not  as  a  human  being, 
the  capitalist  system  must  plead  guilty  to  using 
him  inefficiently.  As  a  mere  machine,  the  worker 
would  run  more  efficiently  and  in  the  sum  total 
would  produce  more  if  capitalism  could  plan  his 
years  of  service.  I^ut  capitalism  cannot.  It  is 
organized  for  profits,  for  the  highest  possible 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUALITY  OF  PRODUCTION      17 

profits  and  usually  for  profits  quickly,  not  ulti- 
mately, realized.  A  few  industries  employing 
highly  skilled  labor  may  devote  themselves  to 
securing  the  maximum  product  from  their  work- 
men during  the  latter 's  lifetime,  secure  in  the 
probability  that  most  of  the  workmen  will  spend 
their  lifetime  of  labor  in  those  plants;  but  such 
industries  are  exceptional  in  the  capitalist  system. 
Similarly  exceptional,  on  the  whole,  are  those 
workmen  who  are  not  thrust  into  industry  too 
early  in  life  and  too  untrained,  who  are  not 
worked  too  long  or  too  hard,  who  are  not  sub- 
jected to  wasteful  periods  of  unemployment,  and 
who  are  not  paid  too  low  wages  to  guarantee 
that  their  total  actual  lifetime  product  will 
closely  approximate  their  total  potential  lifetime 
product. 

Aside  from  the  well-organized  and  skilled  work- 
ers— whose  number  is  hardly  above  the  4,000,000, 
or  4,500,000  membership  of  the  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor  and  the  few  non- American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor  unions — the  workers'  potential  re- 
sources of  a  lifetime  are  burned  at  both  ends,  and 
they  are  thrown  on  the  scrap-heap  years  before 
an  efficiently  adjusted  schedule  of  labor  would  dis- 
pense with  their  efforts.  Especially  rapid  is  the 
feeding  of  this  human  scrap-heap  in  those  enter- 
prises which  are  not  well  regulated  by  uiiioniza- 
tiaiL^  unionization  is  weaker  among  the  women 
than  among  the  men;  and  it  is  the  women  whose 


18  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

strength  should  particularly  be  conserved  for  the 
welfare  of  the  race.  True,  there  is  a  steadily  in* 
creasing  amount  of  protective  legislation  for 
women,  and  for  men  in  dangerous  employments 
such  as  mining  and  match-making;  but  the  fact 
remains  that  a  systematically  and  nationally 
planned  schedule  of  training  for  work,  of  voca- 
tional guidance,  of  wages,  of  regularization  of 
industry,  of  housing,  of  recreation,  for  industry 
as  a  whole  would  see  most  workers  produce  far 
more  in  their  allotted  span  than  the  capitalist  sys- 
tem permits  them  to  produce. 

In  1919  and  part  of  1920,  the  employers  of  labor 
complained  aloud  from  the  housetops  of  a  short- 
age of  labor.  In  1919  and  1920,  however,  there 
were  men  in  their  graves  who  would  have  been 
alive,  working,  had  it  not  been  for  the  havoo 
wrought  on  them  by  the  devastation  of  too  long, 
too  hard,  too  early-begun,  too  irregular,  too  poor- 
ly-paid labor.  There  were  others  alive,  but  unem- 
ployable, who  might  have  been  employable.  There 
were  still  others  employed  and  at  work,  whose 
work  in  neither  quantity  nor  quality  was  what  it 
might  have  been  under  a  more  systematic  and 
longer-range  direction  of  industry  and  of  indus- 
try's labor  force  than  the  capitalist  system,  by 
its  very  essence,  is  able  to  undertake. 

There  is  not  only  this  social  inefficiency  in  capi- 
talism's  use  of  human  material;  there  is  also  the 
inefficiency  involved  when  many  competing  busi- 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUALITY  OF  PRODUCTION      19 

ness  enterprises  perform  similar  tasks  that  could 
be  more  efficiently  performed  by  the  more  special- 
ized processes  of  fewer  non-competing,  larger  and 
more  highly-monopolized  business  enterprises.  Of 
course,  the  waste  inherent  in  competition  is  most 
marked  in  the  households  of  the  land,  with  their 
thousands  of  individual  adjacent  kitchens  and  re- 
frigerators and  furnaces  and  washboards.  But 
there  is  also  the  inefficiency  of  parallel  railroads 
with  coal-burning  locomotives,  where  a  separate 
system  of  electrification  for  each  road  would  be 
less  economical,  but  where  a  central  system  of 
electrification  for  several  roads  would  be  more 
economical.  There  is  the  inefficiency  of  hauling 
coal  a  thousand  miles  to  a  locality  which  could  be 
served  by  coal  mined  five  hundred  miles  away  if 
the  coal  mines  of  the  land  were  nationalized  into 
a  single  producing  and  distributing  system.  And 
there  is  the  costly,  inefficiency  involved  when  the 
separate  wagons  of  competing  milk  companies 
traverse  the  same  streets  ,of  the  same  city,  with  the 
milk  of  one  company  transported  from  that  com- 
pany's milk  depot  on  the  west  of  the  city  to  serve 
streets  in  the  east,  at  the  same  time  that  the  milk 
of  a  rival  company  is  being  transported  from  the 
latter 's  depot  in  the  east  of  the  city  to  serve 
streets  in  the  west. 

There  is  not  only  this  inefficiency  in  the  rela- 
tions between  our  various  business  units;  there 
is  also  the  woeful  inefficiency  within  a  single  busi- 


20  THE  LAEGER  SOCIALISM 

ness  unit  in  so  far  as  it  is  engaged  in  a  competitive 
field.  Much  of  the  effort  of  such  a  business  unit  is 
wasted  in  the  mere  process  of  gaining  business 
from  rivals,  efforts  which  from  the  point  of  view 
of  the '  maximum  social  production  are  doubly 
spendthrift.  For  not  only  might  these  efforts  be 
utilized  in  increasing  production,  but  also  their 
expense  is  shifted  to  the  consumer  in  the  guise  of 
increased  cost  of  the  commodities  which  are  pro- 
duced. From  the  social  point  of  view,  it  makes 
no  difference  which  of  a  half-dozen  brands  of 
clothing  or  shaving-soap  or  automobile  tires  the 
public  consumes.  The  money  and  effort  spent  by 
the  clothing,  shaving-soap  and  rubber  companies 
in  persuading  the  men  of  the  nation  to  buy  one 
brand  of  clothing,  shaving-soap  or  automobile  tire 
instead  of  another  are  money  and  effort  squan- 
dered while  they  might  be  utilized  in  producing 
larger  supplies  of  the  same  goods  or  other  goods. 
Similarly,  there  is  the  waste  of  money  and  effort 
represented  in  our  extensive  corps  of  travelling 
salesmen.  Outside  of  whatever  truly  useful  serv- 
ice they  render  in  making  adjustments  and  in 
furnishing  details  and  information  which  cannot 
well  be  handled  at  long  distance,  their  time  and 
upkeep  go  to  the  mere  juggling  of  sales  to  one 
business  unit  instead  of  to  another^  juggling  which 
adds  not  a  single  cubit  to  the  stature  of  the  coun- 
try's supply  of  the  goods  thereby  sold. 

There  are  not  only  these  parasitical  aspects  of 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUALITY  OF  PRODUCTION      21 

business  enterprises  whose  efforts  are  otherwise 
socially  useful ;  there  are  also  business  enterprises 
which  are  wholly  parasitical  or  even  harmful. 
There  are  those  advertising  organizations  which 
merely  increase  the  expense  of  producing  com- 
modities, by  conducting  campaigns  for  the  pur- 
chase of  one  brand  instead  of  .another.  In  so  far 
as  they  relieve  their  clients  from  doing  their  own 
advertising,  these  organizations  would  fall  under 
the  category  of  the  above  paragraph ;  but  they  do 
more.  By  solicitation  they  bring  into  existence 
advertising  which  without  that  solicitation  would 
never  be  born.  Much  of  this  artificially-created 
advertising  has  the  effect  of  keeping  alive  busi- 
ness units  which  would  serve  the  community  better 
by  dying,  because  they  do  not  produce  as  cheaply 
and  efficiently  as  their  rivals.  Not  only  would 
the  death  of  inefficient  business  units  thus  kept 
alive  by  artificial  respiration  release  the  whole 
market  for  the  goods  produced  most  efficiently  and 
cheaply,  but  also  the  very  increase  in  size  thereby 
made  possible  for  the  more  efficient  plants  would 
in  many  cases  enable  the  latter  to  increase  their 
size  so  as  to  produce  even  more  efficiently,  and 
thus  to  sell  their  goods  even  more  cheaply. 

To  an  extent  these  advertising  companies  may 
often  perform  a  real  sp.rvico.  in  cringing  a  useful 
commodity  before  the  public,  ruch  as  safety  razors 
at  the  time  of  their  invention;  but  on  the  other 
hanpl  they  often  inflict  a  real  injury  by  inducing 


22  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

the  purchase  of  luxuries,  such  as  a  new  limousine 
when  the  old  one  might  we!1  have  served  for 
another  year ;  or  by  stimulating  for  a  trip  to  Palm 
Beach  the  expenditure  of  money  which  might 
otherwise  go  to  the  relief  of  Vienna,  where  there 
die  for  the  lack  of  a  mere  crust  of  bread  thou- 
sands of  children  whose  labor  in  the  coming 
decades  would  be  of  priceless  value  in  repairing 
the  wreck  of  European  industry  and  agriculture. 
Similarly,  there  are  the  lawyers  who  live  by  en- 
abling corporations  to  indulge  in  practises  which 
injure  the  body  social  as  much  as  they  enrich  the 
corporations — a  waste  of  much  of  the  nation's 
best  brain  power;  there  are  the  stock-brokers 
whose  chief  effort  lies  in  enabling  respectable 
gamblers  to  buy  and  sell  on  margins,  rather  than 
in  providing  a  market  for  necessary  securities; 
there  are  the  book-agents;  there  are  the  middle- 
men and  jobbers  who  perform  little  or  no  indis- 
pensable service  in  facilitating  the  marketing  of 
foodstuffs. 

There  is  not  only  this  wasteful  lack  of  guidance 
over  the  kinds  of  goods  and  the  quantities  of  goods 
which  the  capitalist  system  produces ;  there'is  also 
the  cleavage  between  the  two  antagonistic  camps 
in  business  which  the  capitalist  system  accen- 
tuates. When  the  relations  between  Capital  and 
Labor  become  so  strained  that  they  eventuate  in 
a  strike  or  a  lockout,  that  strike  or  lockout  spells 
far  greater  inefficiency  than  all  the  inefficiency  al- 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUALITY  OF  PEODUCTION      23 

leged  for  Government  management  or  for  work- 
ers' management  in  industry.  An  idle  factory 
is  the  last  word  in  futility,  and  a  system  which 
from  time  to  time  renders  factories  idle  is  the  last 
word  in  a  futile  system.  And  even  where  the 
struggle  of  Labor  to  profit  at  the  expense  of 
Capital,  and  of  Capital  to  profit  at  the  expense  of 
Labor,  does  not  come  into  the  open  in  the  form 
of  strikes  and  lockouts,  it  may  and  constantly  does 
smoulder  under  the  surface  in  the  form  of  the 
least  effort  by  Labor  allowable  (negative  sabot- 
age), wastefulness,  carelessness,  and  unnecessary 
11  vacations"  fronl  work — what  the  defenders  of 
the  present  order  call  the  refusal  to  give  a  full 
day's  work  for  a  full  day's  wage.  Of  course,  it 
cannot  be  argued  that  the  mere  substitution  of 
'public  for  private  capital  in  production  means 
the  complete  end  of  strikes  or  of  bad  feeling  be- 
tween employer  and  employee — there  is  the  ex- 
ample of  the  great  strike  on  the  French  Govern- 
mental railways  several  years  before  the  World 
War;  and  the  present  unorganized  " outlaw"  rail- 
way strike  which  is  convulsing  the  United  States 
as  I  write  well  might  have  been  called  several 
months  previously,  when  the  railroads  were  in 
the  hands  of  the  Government. 

Nevertheless,  much  of  the  recalcitrancy  of 
Labor  today  is  due  to  the  fact  that  it  is  arrayed 
against  private  instead  of  public  Capital — the 
antagonism  is  often  personal.  For  when  Labor 


24  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

downs  tools  in  an  enterprise  pertaining  to  the 
Government  today,  it  is  apt  to  feel  that  it  is  strik- 
ing in  reality  against  private  Capital.  For  such 
a  Government  enterprise  is  still  the  exception 
rather  than  the  rule  while  most  enterprises  under 
that  Government  are  still  privately  owned  and 
still  directed  for  private  profit.  It  is  another,  and 
by  no  means  the  least,  of  the  indictments  against 
the 'capitalist  system  that  under  it  such  private 
enterprises  have  much  to  gain  by  controlling  the 
political  Government;  and  it  is  rarely  that  they 
are  unable  to  resist  the  inducement.  Where  this 
business  control  of  Government  is  not  direct,  it 
may  function  indirectly  by  creating  in  the  Govern- 
ment, latterly  largely  through  propagandizing  of 
public  opinion,  a  psychology  favorable  to  the 
fortunes  of  the  profit-makers.  Often,  of  course, 
the  business  interests  do  not  succeed  in  capturing 
the  Government  for  their  point  of  view,  but  they 
succeed  often  enough  to  preserve  in  Government 
Labor  at  present  the  feeling  that  in  reality  it  is 
still  capitalist  Labor.  The  strikers  on  the  French 
railways  in  effect  were  striking  against  capitalist 
employers ;  and  in  the  United  States,  the  Govern- 
ment operation  of  the  railways  was  so  manifestly 
temporary,  and  so  manifestly  on  terms  favorable 
to  the  private  owners  of  the  railways,  that  even 
if  a  railway  strike  had  been  called,  it  could  hardly 
have  been  fairly  considered  a  strike  against  a 
truly  governmental  enterprise. 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUALITY  OF  PRODUCTION      25 

There  is  not  only  the  inefficiency  of  our  scheme 
of  producing;  thore  is  also  the  ludicrous  ineffi- 
ciency of  the  varying  rate  of  speed  at  which  most 
of  our  nidastry  proceeds.  There  is  little  check 
upon  over-production,  there  is  little  stimulation 
against  under-production.  Each  business  unit 
produces  as  it  sees  fit ;  it  naturally  produces  most 
lavishly  when  profits  are  most  lavish ;  when  profits 
are  most  lavish  in  one  £eld,  they  are  apt  to  be 
most  lavish  in  all  fields.;  all  business  units  are 
thus  producing  their  maximum  at  the  same  time ; 
there  is  no  check  to  prevent  that  maximum  from 
becoming  more  than  the  world  in  normal  times 
can  consume ;  hence  one  more  factor  works  toward 
a  business  depression,  and  it  is  the  country,  not 
merely  the  worker,  who  suffers.  And  a  country's 
economic  extravagance  in  times  of  over-produc- 
tion can  by  no  means  balance  its  economic  penury 
in  times  of  under-production,  any  more  than  the 
hundred  dollars  which  a  man  spends  when  his  in- 
come is  $10,000  yearly  can  balance  the  hundred 
dollars  which  he  spends  when  his  income  is  $3,000 
yearly.  , 

Furthermore,  there  is  inefficient  internal  ir- 
regularity within  many  industries  considered  as 
individual  industries — the  investigation  of  the  re- 
cent soft  coal  strike  proved  that  most  of  the 
miners  were  employed  eight  hours  a  day  during 
certain  months  of  the  year  and  were  almost  in- 
variably "laid  off"  for  other  months  of  every 


26  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

« 

year.  In  other  industries,  the  working  year  is 
composed  of  periods  of  hectic  overtime,  normal 
hours  and  dully  habitual  stagnation — a  wasteful 
irregularity  possible  of  mitigation  in  even  the  so- 
called  " seasonal"  industries.  Again,  there  is 
nothing  to  prevent  an  industry  from  producing 
a  limited  supply  of  commodities  at  a  large  profit 
per  unit  instead  of  an  extensive  supply  at  a 
nominal  profit  per  unit.  Our  economic  proc- 
esses are  as  unguided  as  the  appetite  of  a  child 
who  eats  all  five  boxes  of  his  Christmas  candy  at 
one  sitting  and  then  must  spend  the  next  day 
in  bed. 

As  against  the  inefficiency  of  this  mode  of  pro- 
duction, inextricably  inherent  in  the  capitalist 
system,  the  Socialists  would  do  well  to  dwell  with 
the  utmost  insistence  upon  the  cardinal  point  of 
efficiency  in  Socialist  production.  That  point  is 
the  regularization  of  industry — regularization  of 
kind  of  output,  of  amount  of  output  and  of  method 
of  output.  True,  a  certain  degree  of  such  regu- 
larization is  possible  to  capitalist  industry.  The 
trade  union  movement  will  grow  apace,  and  its 
checks  upon  the  exploitation  of  the  worker  will 
become  sterner.  Welfare  legislation  will  be  ex- 
tended. Women  will  be  protected  more  stringently. 
America  may  almost  catch  up  to  Europe  in  social 
insurance.  The  child  labor  limits  will  be  raised 
and  doubtless  will  be  made  national.  Safety  and 
sanitary  regulations  will  be  applied  more  strictly 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUALITY  OF  PRODUCTION      27 

by  law  and  by  trade  union  pressure,  and  work- 
men's compensation  will  be  expanded  to  cover 
most,  if  not  all,  industries.  Minimum  wages  may 
cease  to  recognize  sex  distinctions.  Some  less 
rusty  and  creaking  machinery  than  at  present 
available  may  reduce  the  numb'er  and  extent  of 
strikes  and  lockouts.  The  federal  reserve  bank- 
ing system  and  the  private  bankers,  possibly  with 
the  cooperation  of  the  leaders  of  big  business,  may 
impose  some  slight  checks  upon  over-production — , 
and  some  slight  stimulus  against  under-produc- 
:ion.  Competition  conceivably  will  wane,  and  will 
be  replaced  by  greater  concentration,  with  in- 
creased efficiency,  in  industry ;  and  there  well  may 
be  imposed  limits  upon  the  percentage  of  profits 
to  be  gained  by  private  business. 

But  even  this  highly  sanguine  program  does  not 
meet  the  main  issue  in  efficiency  of  production  as 
a  Socialist  program  can  meet  it.  Capitalism  can- 
not compel  its  producers  to  move  from  the  field 
of  luxuries  to  the  field  of  necessities  if  there  be 
greater  profit  in  luxuries  than  in  necessities ;  nor 
can  it  drive  its  producers  to  enter  fields,  how- 
ever essential  to  the  public  welfare,  where  there 
is  no  profit;  nor  can  it  impose  upon  its  producers 
a  ban  on  profitable  over-production  or  a  demand 
for  unprofitable  increase  of  production  in  periods 
of  under-production. 

Under  Socialism,  on  the  other  hand,  production 
would  be  guided  by  the  public  need,  not  by  profits. 


28 

To  each  individual  would  be  guaranteed  a  return 
from  his  labor  sufficient  to  supply  him  with  at 
least  the  material  necessities  of  life  incident  upon 
the  maintenance  of  a  socially  useful  standard  of 
living.  The  demand  for  these  necessities  would 
then  practically  coincide  with  the  need  for  them. 
("Practically,"  and  not  entirely,  because  a  thor- 
oughly wise  expenditure  of  its  income  by  the 
population  could  not  be,  as  it  ought  not  be,  guar- 
anteed.) The  Socialist  state  would  then  recog- 
nize as  the  first  lien  upon  it  the  production  and 
distribution  of  the  necessities  of  life  to  the  ex- 
tent to  satisfy  practically  all  the  public  needs  for 
them. 

After  having  seen  to  the  production  and  dis- 
tribution of  the  necessities  of  life,  the  Socialist 
state  would  turn  to  the  semi-necessities.  For  the 
production  of  these,  the  amount  of  land,  labor, 
capital  and  promoting  and  administrative  skill 
left  available  might  well  demand  consideration. 
The  potential  productivity  immediately  available, 
of  course,  would  be  increased  by  a  number  of  fac- 
tors. Thus,  the  production  of  goods  directly  harm- 
ful, such  as  patent  medicines,  might  be  flatly  for- 
bidden. Again,  the  land,  labor,  capital  and  organ- 
izing and  administrative  skill  now  utilized  in  com- 
petition between  separate  business  units  and  with- 
in individual  business  units  would  largely  become 
available  for  new  positive  and  direct  productivity. 
At  all  events,  up  to  whatever  point  the  Socialist 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUALITY  OF  PRODUCTION      29 

state  might  conceive  essentials,  semi-essentials 
and  even  quasi-essentials  to  end,  and  non-essen- 
tials to  begin,  the  state  would  be  responsible  for 
production.  rt  (In. practise,  of  course,  it  would  be 
impossible  ,to  draw  that  line  with  any  degree  of 
dogmatism.)  In  addition,  the  producers  of  non- 
essentials  would  find  it  necessary  or  desirable  to 
utilize  much  of  the  material  evolving  from  Social- 
ist production  of  essentials — for  the  printers  and 
binders  of  de  luxe  editions,  for  instance,  the 
leather  from  the  state  tanneries,  supplied  from  the 
state  slaughter-houses  by  hides  from  the  cattle 
on  the  state  ranches,  as  well  as  the  paper  pro- 
duced (perhaps  on  order)  from  the  state  paper 
mills  supplied  by  the  state  forests,  would  prob- 
ably be  found  more  economical  than  the  privately 
produced  leather  and  paper.  On  the  state's  side, 
the  desirability  of  selling  leather  and  paper  to  the 
private  producers  still  existing,  and  even  the  per- 
mission to  them  to  produce  and  to  use  leather  and 
paper  for  and  by  themselves,  would  obviously  de- 
pend upon  the  current  plentifulness  of,  and  free- 
dom from  fear  of  future  shortage  in,  leather  and 
paper. 

The  state  industries  of  the  cooperative  common- 
wealth need  not  necessarily  all  become  more 
highly  centralized  than  certain  of  our  big  indus- 
tries at  present.  Thus  it  might  prove  more  effi- 
cient to  utilize  the  present  more  or  less  separate 
organizations  of  the  United  States  Steel  Corpora- 


30  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

tion,  the  Bethlehem  Steel  Company  and  Jones 
and  Laughlin  than  to  combine  them.  There  might 
be  centralization  in  certain  aspects  of  buying  ore 
and  higher  specialization  in  manufacturing  cer- 
tain steel  products ;  but  it  might  prove  beneficial 
to  the  efficiency  of  the  state  industrial  productivity 
under  Socialism  to  encourage  these  separate  steel 
organizations  to  compete  with  one  another — com- 
petition to  see  which  could  best  serve  the  public, 
not  best  serve  itself  at  the  expense  of  the  public. 
The  problem  of  food  distribution  would  certainly 
have  to  be  met  by  machinery  almost  as  decentral- 
ized as  Mr.  Hoover's  Pood  Administration  dur- 
ing the  World  War,  with  its  separate  state  food 
administrations.  A  similar  system  would  prob- 
ably have  to  be  followed  by  the  state  dry-goods 
and  other  retail  stores.  Probably  chiefly  in  the 
ordering  and  purchase  of  raw  materials  would 
complete  amalgamation  and  centralization  of  the 
various  producing  and  distributing  units  in  one 
branch  of  the  largest-scale  industry  be  found  the 
most  efficient  and  economical  system.  There  could 
be  no  adamantine  rule  as  to  the  extent  to  which 
higher  monopolization  and  centralization  than 
that  at  present  obtaining  under  capitalism  would 
be  found  more  economical  and  the  extent  to  which 
it  would  be  found  more  costly. 

Only,  each  industry  would  be  guided  with  an 
eye  to  its  welfare  in  the  future — newsprint  paper 
might  be  made  even  scarcer  than  at  present  in 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUALITY  OF  PRODUCTION      31 

order  that  it  might  become  more  instead  of  less 
plentiful  in  the  next  generation.  Each  industry 
would  be  managed  at  that  varying  rate  of  pro- 
duction which  in  a  given  season  would  not  glut  the 
market  with  its  products  nor  fail  to  satisfy  its 
market's  legitimate  demands.  In  addition,  there 
would  be  correlative  guidance  between  industry 
and  industry — a  bad  corn  crop  in  one  year  would 
see  more  land  turned  over  to  corn  next  year,  pos- 
sibly at  the  expense  of  tobacco ;  and  manufactures 
would  be  speeded  several  months  before  the  great 
harvest  season  and  depressed  during  the  great 
need  for  harvest  labor  and  for  freight-cars,  so  as 
to  ensure  for  society  the  maximum  agricultural 
acquisition  from  the  crops  available  for  acquisi- 
tion. Finally,  the  state  would  conduct  new  enter- 
prises which  would  promote  the  public  welfare, 
even  though  it  would  prove  impossible  for  them 
to  meet  their  material  expenses — the  Eural  Free 
Delivery  principle  applied,  for  instance,  to  the 
construction  of  railroads,  or  of  gas  and  electricity 
plants,  or  of  sewerage  systems,  or  of  hospitals, 
in  sparsely-settled  regions. 


CHAPTER  H. 

SOCIALISM    AND    QUANTITY    OP    PRODUCTION. 

To  an  extent,  but  only  to  an  extent,  the  Co- 
operative Commonwealth  can  eat  its  cake  and 
have  it,  too.  To  an  extent,  it  can  lower  the  num- 
ber of  its  hours  of  labor  without  temporarily 
lowering1  production  and  increase  wages  with- 
out temporarily  heightening  the  cost  of  commodi- 
ties. For  example,  during  the  World  War  a  ten- 
hour  day  in  the  British  manufacture  of  munitions 
gave  forth  fewer  and  poorer  munitions  than  the. 
eight-hour  day — not  only  fewer  munitions  per 
hour,  but  fewer  in  sum  total.  Great  Britain 
similarly  discovered  that  the  munitions  output  of 
a  seven-day  week  and  a  fifty-two-week  year  proved 
itself  lower  and  poorer  than  the  output  of  a  six- 
day  week  and  a  fifty-week  year,  again  not  only 
relatively,  but  absolutely.  There  was  nothing  un- 
precedented in  this  discovery.  Many  a  private 
manufacturer  has  found  a  decrease,  voluntary  or 
involuntary,  in  his  plant's  working-hours  an  aid, 
not  a  hindrance,  to  output.  No  element  of  pro- 
duction wreaks  havoc  comparable  to  that  wrought 
by  sabotage,  and  fatigue  is  a  prime  saboteur  of 
industry. 

32 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    33 

But  there  are  nonetheless  limits  upon  the  gains 
in  production,  or  lack  of  losses  in  production,  to 
be  realized  by  the  elimination  of  fatigue.  Such 
limits  may  seldom  be  clearly  indicated,  and  they 
may  vary  markedly  from  industry  to  industry,  but 
they.are  still  real  and  potent.  We  laugh  out  of 
court  the  irate  defender  of  the  status  quo  ante 
bellum  in  industry  who  insists  that  the  chief  fac- 
tor in  the  present  increased  cost  of  living  has  been 
the  extension  of  trade  unionism,  with  the  conse- 
quent reduction  of  the  working-hours  of  Labor. 
But  we  should  no  less  insistently  laugh  out  of 
court  the  optimistic  Socialist  who  would  deny  that 
the  reduction  of  working-hours  has  constituted  one 
of  the  factors  in  the  high  cost  of  living.  It  is  not 
a  question  of  defending  that  reduction  of  hours 
as  helpful  to  the  well-being  of  the  community,  or 
of  arraigning  it  as  harmful.  It  is  a  question  of 
finding  other  fathers  to  our  thoughts  than  wishes, 
and  of  admitting  that  only  in  exceptional  indus^ 
tries  today  would  a  radical  reduction  of  hours  at 
once  provide  increased  production  absolutely  so 
well  as  relatively ;  or  even  fail  to  cause  for  a  time 
definite  decline  in  absolute  (though  not  in  rela- 
tive) production.  x 

Such  exceptional  industries  for  the  greater  part 
would  fall  into  two  categories.  The  first  would 
comprise  those  in  which  the  work  is  so  delicate 
that  the  slightest  deviation  from  the  norm,  such 
as  that  caused  by  the  worker's  involuntary  relax- 


34  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

ation  of  his  attention,  renders  the  product  useless. 
In  this  category  would  be  included  munitions 
manufacture  and  similar  undertakings,  relatively 
few  in  number.  Indeed,  so  few  are  such  under- 
takings, and  so  small  are  their  products  in  com- 
parison with  the  total  output  of  an  industrial  na- 
tion like  the  United  States,  that  a  Socialist  state 
would  probably  be  little  aided  by  the  fact  that  a 
reduction  of  hours  would  not  cause  decreased  pro- 
duction in  such  industries. 

In  the  second  category  would  fall  such  indus- 
tries as  work  their  employees  at  so  terrific  a  speed, 
or  still  for  so  abnormally  long  hours,  that  the 
end  of  the  work-day  finds  them  subject,  not  merely 
to  normal  fatigue,  but  to  abnormally  intense  fa- 
tigue. For  although  the  elimination  of  normal 
fatigue  by  reduction  of  hours  can  usually  be  re- 
lied upon  to  effect  an  increase  in  output  relatively, 
the  fatigue  of  the  worker  must  be  abnormally  in- 
tense before  its  elimination  will  provide  an  in- 
crease in  his  output  absolutely  so  well  as  rela- 
tively. And  with  all  due  agreement  with  those  who 
excoriate  the  effect  of  our  present-day  productive 
processes  upon  the  minds  and  bodies  of  those  en- 
gaged in  them,  it  must  be  admitted  that  most  of 
our  industries  today  hardly  fall  within  this  cate- 
gory. Large  stretches  of  the  iron  and  steel  in- 
dustry, and  probably  most  of  the  manufacturing 
industries  of  the  South,  yes;  but  although  the 
eight-hour  day  may  not  yet  have  become  the  rule 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    35 

in  the  United  States,  yet  on  the  whole  the  twelve- 
hour  day  has  also  become  the  exception. 

For  instance,  the  report  of  the  Commissioner  of 
Labor  of  the  state  of  Michigan  for  the  year  1918 
gives  the  average  number  of  work-hours  in  the 
factories  and  workshops  of  that  state  for  that 
year,  as  found  by  some  15,600  inspections, 
as  53.7  per  week  for  men  in  offices  and  54.2  per 
week  for  men  in  all  other  factory  and  workshop 
labor.  The  average  hours  worked  weekly  by 
women  was  49.8.  (Michigan  limits  by  law  the 
number  of  hours  worked  by  women  to  54  per 
week  and  10  per  day.)  In  the  city  of  Detroit, 
where  it  is  true  that  working  conditions  would 
probably  be  found  less  onerous  than  in  most  other 
large  cities  of  the  country,  more  than  3,000  inspec- 
tions showed  49.1  hours  per  week  as  the  average 
for  men  office-workers,  53.2  hours  per  week  for  all 
other  male  employees  in  factories  and  workshops, 
and  48.9  for  the  women  workers.  And,  on  the 
whole,  the  daily  hours  of  labor  in  most  localities 
probably  tended  slightly  to  decrease  in  1919  in 
comparison  with  1918. 

Now,  although  any  generalizations  on  the  rela- 
tion between  length  of  work-day  and  quantity  of 
workers'  output  in  industry  largely  remain  mere 
opinion,  yet  it  will  probably  be  agreed  that  it 
is  the  twelve-hour  day  from  which  reductions 
would  effect  increased  output  absolutely  j  and  that 
reductions  f rom  the  eight-hour  day,  although  ef- 


36  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

f  ecting  an  increased  output  per  hour,  would  cause 
a  decreased  total  output.  So  that  even  the  most 
optimistic  Socialist  must  be  prepared  to  discover 
that  if  in  industry  as  a  whole  the  Cooperative 
Commonwealth  reduces  daily  hours  from  twelve  to 
ten,  the  output  may  improve  in  absolute  quan- 
tity; that  from  ten  to  eight,  there  is  at  least  the 
possibility  that  it  will  decline  in  absolute  quantity; 
and  that  if  the  Cooperative  Commonwealth  fulfills 
its  "promise  of  affording  its  workers  less  than  eight 
hours  of  work  per  day,  there  is  a  strong  probabil- 
ity that  the  total  amount  of  output  will  decrease. 
And  that  decrease  would  persist  until  such  time  as 
the  long-range  efficiency  of  shorter  hours  upon  the 
total  lifetime  serviceability  of  the  worker  could 
make  its  force  felt.  A-  Socialist  administration 
would  probably  be  entitled  to  felicitations  if  it 
discovered  that  in  most  industries  a  20%  reduc- 
tion in  hours  below  eight  per  day  for  the  first 
years  resulted  in  only  a  10%  reduction  in  total 
output. 

In  the  case  of  the  farmer,  the  reduction  of  out- 
put due  to  shortening  of  hours  might  even  be 
found  more  than  temporary.  Many  of  the  cir- 
cumstances now  lowering  the  potential  lifetime 
output  of  the  worker  in  industry  do  not  operate 
upon  the  agriculturist.  Furthermore,  the  in- 
evitable isolation  of  the  farmer  renders  him,  even 
in  a  Socialist  state,  less  susceptible  to  such  gen- 
eral communal  factors  in  raising  his  total  pro- 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    37 

ductivity  as  longer  schooling  and  better  health 
facilities.  At  least  in  the  immediate  future,  there 
seems  to  be  every  indication  that  agriculture  will 
continue  to  be  pursued  largely  as  an  individual 
task,  and  will  not  follow  the  path  of  highly  con- 
centrated and  specialized  industrial  development. 
Under  such  circumstances,  the  farmer  will  pro- 
duce less  if  he  works  less.  But  the  farmer's  work- 
day must  be  materially  shortened  in  a  Socialist 
state.  Even  if  he  did  not  insist,  or  did  not  effec- 
tively insist,  on  sharing  in  the  general  shortening 
of  the  work-day  resulting  from  the  advent  of  So- 
cialism, no  Socialist  Government  could  deem  itself 
sincerely  solicitous  for  the  entire  community's 
well-being  if  it  did  not  voluntarily  provide  for  a 
generous  lightening  of  the  lead  of  the  present 
sunrise-to-sunset  work-day  of  the  agricultural 
population. 

Otherwise,  this  loss  in  productivity,  as  previous- 
ly indicated,  might  in  all  fairness  not  be  expected 
to  last  beyond  a  generation.  Or,  at  least,  in  all 
fairness  it  might  be  expected  to  begin  to  disappear 
after  a  generation.  But  for  a  temporary  period, 
a  Socialist  state  would  have  to  reckon  with  it. 
For  by  the  essence  of  Socialism  any  Socialist  ad- 
ministration is  in  duty  bound,  and  almost  im- 
mediately upon  arriving  in  power,'  to  reducd  work- 
ing-hours below  those  now  in  force  over  the  broad, 
general  field  of  industry.  Only  let  such  Socialist 
administration  effect  such  reduction  with  its  eyes 


38  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

open.  Let  it  appreciate  that  for  a  period  the  re- 
sulting decrease  in  the  output  of  essentials  will 
have  to  be  met,  and  can  be  met  only  by  utilizing 
more  workmen  in  the  production  of  them. 

Such  an  increase  in  the  labor  force  should  be 
available  for  diversion  into  the  essential  and  quasi- 
essential  industries  as  a  result  of  the  elimination 
of  most  of  the  socially- wasteful  activities  and  en- 
terprises of  the  capitalist  system.  Immediately 
available  should  be  most  of  the  Labor  now  en- 
gaged in  the  parasitic  enterprises  which  would  be 
discontinued  almost  at  the  outset  of  a  Socialist  ad- 
ministration. Connected  with  this  new  source  of 
supply  of  workers  would  be  that  released  by  the 
discontinuance  of  the  purely  competitive  and 
parasitic  aspects  of  enterprises  otherwise  not  to 
be  classed  as  competitive  and  parasitic.  And  so 
interwoven  and  ramified  is  all  our  industry  in  the 
twentieth  century  that  such  economy  of  labor  in 
certain  fields  has  the  effect  of  ensuring  economy 
of  labor  in  almost  all  fields.  For  instance,  the 
elimination  of  our  competitive  advertising  will 
eliminate  a  part  of  the  labor  used  in  setting  type 
for  advertisements,  in  plating  the  type,  in  making 
the  paper  on  which  such  advertisements  are 
printed,  in  cutting  the  wood  from  the  pulp  of 
which  such  paper  is  manufactured,  in  painting  the 
sign-boards  used  to  display  such  advertisements, 
in  manufacturing  the  paint  for  such  sign-boards 
and  so  forth.  Moreover,  there  should  be  the 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    39 

saving  in  labor-supply  due  to  the  sharp  decrease 
in  the  number  of  strikes  and  lockouts.  Also,  there 
will  be  the  seepage  of  the  leisure  class  into  the 
ranks  of  the  workers ;  for  perhaps  the  least  dis- 
putable act  of  a  Socialist  state  would  be  a  fairly 
rigid  application  of  the  "no  work,  no  eat"  prin- 
ciple and,  Soviet  or  no  Soviet,  a  quite  rigid  appli- 
cation of  the  "no  work,  no  vote"  principle. 

As  a  feature  of  this  last  consummation  will  be 
included  the  transfer  into  active  industry  of  a 
large  number  of  middle-class  and  upper-class 
women  from  their  light,  and  more  or  less  socially 
dispensable,  efforts  in  the  household.  True,  this 
problem  will  be  shot  through  and  through  with 
many  factors  rendering  legislation  on  the  sub- 
ject open  to  great  antagonism,  difficult  of  realiza- 
tion, and  still  more  difficult  of  enforcement.  But 
it  .  is  inconceivable  that  public  opinion  under 
Socialism  should  tolerate  to  the  extent  that  public 
opinion  now  tolerates  the  economic  dependence 
of  woman  on  man  through  the  mere  fact  of  mar- 
riage, as  it  has  now  in  many  cases  reached  the 
point  of  refusing  to  tolerate  the  economic  de-y 
pendence  of  man  on  woman  merely  through  that 
fact.  Even  where  the  married  woman  performs 
a  modicum  of  necessary  labor  in  the  household, 
public  opinion  will  become  less  tolerant  than  at 
present  of  a  woman's  expenditure  of  some  fifty 
dollars  a  week  as  her  share  of  the  family's  expen- 


40  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

s 

diture  while  she  renders  service  obtainable  from 
others  for  some  ten  or  fifteen  dollars  a  week. 

Moreover,  the  general  impetus  toward  stand- 
ardization, centralization  and  voluntary  coopera- 
tion inherent  merely  in  the  predominance  of  the 
Socialist  philosophy  will  tend  to  professionalize 
and  at  the  same  time  to  lighten  the  burdens,  and 
thus  the  hours,  of  household  service.  This  source 
of  increase  in  the  volume  of  the  available  labor 
force  will  naturally  be  checked  by  the  presence  of 
small  children  in  marriage,  but  such  check  might 
prove  inconsiderable.  In  the  first  place,  the  in- 
crease of  economic  well-being  guaranteed  by 
Socialism  will  tend  to  make  child-bearing  occur 
earlier  in  marriage,  and  thus  will  free  women  from 
the  care  of  small  children  earlier  than  at  present. 
And  in  the  second  place,  one  of  the  prj^ie  duties 
and  most  far-reaching  services  of  a  Socialist  state 
would  be  the  extension  of  education,  by  means  of 
pre-kindergarten  classes  and  community  creches 
— public  or  privately  cooperative — to  the  years 
preceding  those  at  which  the  child  now  leaves  the 
mother's  care  for  the  public  kindergarten  or  the 
first  grade  of  the  public  elementary  school. 

However,  it  is  at  least  possible  that  this  new 
supply  of  labor  available  for  the  production  of 
essentials  and  quasi-essentials  would  not  be  suffi- 
cient to  make  up  the  loss  in  their  total  volume  due 
to  a  considerable  shortening  of  the  work-day. 
This  possibility  holds  particularly  in  view  of  the 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    41 

.  inevitable  delay  in  fitting  men  trained  to  one  kind 
of  business  to  function  efficiently  in  another  kind. 
Under  such  circumstances,  an  additional  supply 
of  workers  for  the  more  essential  industries  may 
have  to  be  provided  at  the  expense  of  other  fields 
of  endeavor.  Those  other  fields  of  endeavor 

V  would  probably  be  two  in  number.  The  first  would 
be  the  production  of  the  goods  which  are  less  es- 
sential, but  which  are  hardly  to  be  classed  as  lux- 
uries. The  second  would  be  the  socially  remuner- 
ative but  financially  unrenaunerative  Rural  Free 
Delivery  or  Free  Libraries  type  of  Government 
activity  planned  .on  so  extensive  a  scale  by  most 
Socialists. 

Logically,  there  would  be  little  question  as  to 
which  of  these  two  fields  could  best  be  penalized, 
even  temporarily,  for  the  sake  of  the  protection  of 
essentials.  Society  would  thrive  better  by  cutting 
down  its  supply,  of  non-essentials  and  continuing 
in  operation  its  social  welfare  endeavors,  if  reason 
were  to  be  followed.  But  man  is  far  from  being 
a  reasoning  animal.  Even  in  a  Socialist  state  he 
is  apt  to  prefer  non-essentials  which  he  enjoys  to 
welfare  efforts  which  may  be  more  beneficial  to 
him,  but  which  do  not  furnish  him  positive  and 
direct  enjoyment.  He  is  apt,  more  than  apt,  to 
"abandon  a  system  which  denies  him  mere  pleas- 
ures in  favor  of  essentials  for  one  which  furnishes 
him  mere  pleasures  at  the  expense  of  essentials. 
Man  wants  his  tobacco  and  woman  wants  her 


42  THE  LAEGER  SOCIALISM 

t 

candy — although  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thou- 
sand nine  hundred  twenty-one  it  might  be  more 
exact  to  say  that  both  men  and  women  want  their 
tobacco  and  their  candy.  There  can  be  no  guar- 
antee that  they  will  not  prefer  their  tobacco  and 
candy  to  more  frequent  trains  and  to  cheaper 
books,  if  choose  they  must.  There  can  even  be 
little  confidence  that  they  may  not  prove  so  illogi- 
cal as  to  prefer  an  eight-hour  work-day  with  to- 
bacco and  candy  to  a  seven-hour  work-day  with- 
out tobacco  and  candy. 

True,  a  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat  might 
deny  them  the  right  to  choose,  imposing  the  logi- 
cal choice  on  them ;  for,  at  least  in  Eussia,  the  dic- 
tatorship of  the  proletariat  seems  to  imply  the 
dictatorship  of  that  portion  of  the  proletariat 
which  understands  what  is  good  for  the  entire  pro- 
letariat. But  there  is  now  at  hand  little  evidence 
to  indicate  that  Socialism  is  destined  to  arrive,  at 
least  in  Anglo-Saxon  countries,  by  the  Russian 
path.  Accordingly,  a  Socialist  state  of  the  nature 
herein  under  consideration  could  remain  in  power 
only  by  satisfying,  as  well  as  benefiting,  the 
great  majority  of  the  community.  And  the  Social- 
ist state  therefore  would  do  well,  especially  in  its 
earliest  period  of  administration,  to  swell  the 
ranks  of  Labor  in  the  essential  industries  as  little 
as  possible  at  the  expense  of  the  industries  pro- 
ducing goods  which  render  enjoyment,  if  not 
great  service,  to  the  man  in  the  street — even 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    43 

though  thereby  the  prosecution  of  some  of  the  new 
social  welfare  activities  would  have  to  be  curtailed 
or  postponed. 

As  it  is,  much,  if  not  most,  of  the  procedure  ab- 
solutely essential  to  the  efficient  administration  of 
the  Cooperative  Commonwealth  will  run  counter 
to  some  of  the  most  trenchant  prejudices  of  the 
man  in  the  street.  Those  are  the  prejudices 
against  interference  by  the  state  in  the  daily  rou- 
tine of  the^  individual  life.  They  exist  even  where 
such  interference  manifestly  functions  for  the 
material  and  spiritual  benefit  of  the  individual. 
Dispute  as  to  whether  such  prejudices  are  helpful 
or  detrimental  to  the  organization  of  the  Great 
Society  is  beyond  the  point  here,  although  he 
would  be  indeed  a  staunch  defender  of  the 
older  paternalistic  Socialism  who  would  not 
find  in  their  existence  a  sanguine  promise  of 
the  richer  blossoming  of  the  independent  hu- 
man spirit.  The  point  is,  they  exist.  To  an  ex- 
tent, they  exist  innately;  to  a  great  extent,  they 
have  been  assiduously  cultivated  by  what  con- 
tinues to  be,  in  spite  of  some  legislative  attacks 
upon  it,  our  political  and  economic  laissez-faire 
ideology. 

Under  great  emotional  stress,  the  man  in  the 
street  may  be  persuaded  to  acquiesce  without 
much  grumbling  at  the  curtailment  of  the  pleas- 
ures to  which  he  has  accustomed  himself.  He  so 
acquiesced,  on  the  whole,  during  the  World  War. 


44  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

He  may  so  acquiesce  in  the  general  burst  of  fervor 
which  doubtless  will  environ  the  advent  of  a 
Socialist  administration.  Certainly,  he  would  so 
acquiesce,  if  he  were  a  true  proletarian,  denied 
most  of  the  essentials  of  existence,  which  would 
fall  to  his  lot  when  the  state  seriously  curtailed 
the  production  of  non-essentials.  But  in  the 
Marxian  denotation  and  connotation  of  the  word^ 
the  proletarians  in  the  United  States  distinctly  do 
not  comprise  the  bulk  of  the  population.  What 
there  is  of  our  proletariat  is  composed  very  large- 
ly of  our  foreign-born,  and  in  the  United  States 
the  foreign-born  wield  less  influence  than  even 
that  to  which  their  numerical  strength  entitles 
them.  Our  naturalization  pVocedure  serves  to  dis- 
enfranchise some  of  them;  a  large  proportion  of 
the  remainder  are  swayed  by  religious  affiliations 
to  a  somewhat  greater  degree  than  are  tlje  native- 
born;  and  all  of  them  are  subjected  to  the  an- 
tagonism of  the  consciousness-not-of-our-kind 
which  seems  to  have  permeated  America  so  deeply 
of  late,  and  which  hinders. the  legitimate  exercise 
of  political,  social  and  economic  power  by  the  for- 
eign-born, particularly  when  they  attempt  to  exer- 
cise that  power  through  the  Socialist  movement. 
The  conclusion,  then,  soems  to  be  clearly  indi- 
cated. They  Socialist  movement  woi(M  do  well  to 
moderate  its  ultimate  program  and  its  campaign 
promises  to  the  electorate;  regarding  the  reduc- 
tion of  the  work-hours  to  be  anticipated  at  the 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    45 

outset  of  a  Socialist  administration.  The  Social- 
ist movement  will  serve  itself  better  by  postponing 
its  fruition  for  a  few  years  through  such  moder- 
ation than  by  proving  unable  completely  to  ful- 
fil promises  on  which  it  might  probably  ^ide  more 
quickly  to  power.  Of  course,  an  attempt"  might  be 
made  statistically  to  set  a  limit  to  the  reduction  of 
working-hours  possible  to  a  Socialist  state,  along 
^with  other  economic  limits  upon  the  realization  of 
the  Socialist  economic  program.  Such  an  inter- 
esting attempt  has  been  recently  made  by  Pro- 
fessor Boucke.  But  into  such  a  study  there  enter 
so  many  factors  difficult  to  evaluate  that  there  can 
be  no  assurance  that  it  would  prove  more  reliable 
than  the  attempts  of  economists  before  August  1, 
1914,  to  chart  the  amount  of  wealth  which  Europe 
would  find  it  possible  to  expend  upon  an  interna- 
tional war  without  becoming  bankrupt.  A  con- 
servative Socialist  writer  may  hence  be  forgiven 
if  he  hazards  a  mere  guess  that  for  the  first  years 
of  a  Socialist  administration  it  may  well  prove  im- 
practicable to  fix  IPSS  than  seven  hours  of  work 
per  day  as  the  norm;  and  that  ilie  chances  favor 
the  possibility  of  fixing  them  at  six  per  day  little 
more  than  they  favor  the  necessity  of  fixing  them 
at  eight. 

In  passing,  it  should  not  be  forgotten  that  this 
situation  should  be  but  temporary.  The  necessity 
for  this  limitation  on  the  production  of  the  non- 
essentials,  but  more  particularly  on  the  function- 


46  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

ing  of  the  Rural  Free  Delivery  and  social  wel- 
fare type  of  state  activity  under  Socialism,  should 
not  be  long-lived.  After  a  generation,  a  new  sur- 
plusage of  Labor  should  make  itself  available. 
For  after  a  generation,  the  average  worker's  pro- 
ductivity should  be  enormously  increased  over 
that  of  today  by  freeing  him  from  abnormal 
fatigue,  over-long  hours,  too  early  entrance  into 
industry,  lack  of  vacations  necessary  for  bodily 
and  mental  recuperation,  inadequate  medical 
treatment,  bad  housing,  ill-nourishing  food,  scanty 
and  unscientific  training  for  task.  After  a  gen- 
eration, the  Socialist  state  accordingly  should  be 
in  a  position  to  shorten  working-hours  more  radi- 
cally than  at  its  inception,  to  promote  a  greater 
number  of  wide-spread  welfare  activities,  and  to 
extend  to  a  much  greater  scale  the  serviceable  but 
financially  unprofitable  features  of  its  industries. 
It  should  be  then  that  the  full  richness  of  the 
promise  of  the  Socialist  ideal  might  begin  to  ap- 
proximate fulfilment. 

Incidently,  the  temporary  delay  in  its  complete 
fulfilment  which  has  thus  seemed  to  be  inevitable 
may  well  prevent  the  mass  of  the  people  during 
that  delay  from  appreciating  all  the  potential 
benefits  of  Socialism.  Wisely  or  foolishly,  most 
persons  would  probably  expect  a  radical  improve- 
ment in  their  lot  without  delay.  The  electorate  in 
the  United  States  has  proved  itself  notoriously 
callous  to  pleas  to  await  the  blessing?  of  the 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    47 

\  i 

future,  and  unwilling  to  grant  to  an  innovation  a 
reasonable  length  of  time  in  which  to  justify  itself. 
Joined  to  the  other  factors,  material  and  imma- 
terial, sordid  and  sincere,  which  will  be  operative 
to  overthrow  the  Socialist  state  almost  as  soon  as 
it  should  be  born,  this  factor  may  well  prove  ser 
rious.  At  all  events,  it  probably  furnishes  a  most 
cogent,  and  not  infrequently  heard,  argument  for 
those  Socialists  who  maintain  that  Socialism  can- 
not be  achieved  and  stabilized,  even  in  Anglo- 
Saxon  countries,  without  a  temporary  benevolent 
despotism  in  the  guise  of  a  dictatorship. 


Discussion  as  to  the  supply  of  natural  and  ma- 
terial resources  available  for  the  productivity  of 
a  Socialist  state  would  closely  parallel  the  pre- 
ceding discussion  on  hours  of  labor.  Here  again 
the  Cooperative  Commonwealth  will  discover  that 
beyond  a  certain  limit  it  cannot  eat  its  cake  and 
have  it,  'too.  Even  the  Cooperative  Common- 
wealth cannot  produce  a  greater  amount  of  essen- 
tial goods  without  utilizing  a  greater  amount  of 
raw  materials.  And  with  the  recent  squandering 
of  our  natural  resources,  the  Commonwealth  can-, 
not  utilize  a  greater  amount  of  raw  materials  in 
one  field  without  decreasing  the  amount  available 
for  other  fields. 

Postponement  in  the  full  and  completely  effi- 
cient use  of  society's  natural  and  material  re- 


48  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

sources  at  a  Socialist  state's  advent  may  thus  be 
demanded  no  less  sternly  than  postponement  in 
the  full  and  completely  efficient  use  of  society's 
labor-power.  For  in  recent  decades  the  world  has 
paid  less  heed  to  the  replacement  of  its  natural 
resources  than  even  the  wasteful  nature  of  capital- 
ist production  warranted.  It  has  rendered  its 
shortage  of  material  resources  far  more  crippling 
than  it  need  have  been  rendered;  and  especially 
spendthrift  of  nature's  wealth  were  the  four  and 
one-half  years  of  international  warfare.  A  Social- 
ist state,  therefore,  in  order  to  function  produc- 
tively in  accord  with  the  true  principles  of  social 
collectivism,  would  have  to  clamp  down  on  some 
of  its  possible  immediate  use  of  materials  in  pro- 
duction so  as  to  provide  nature  as  long  a  breath- 
ing-space as  possible  in  which  to  recuperate  and 
to  replenish  our  stock  of  raw  materials. 

Indeed,  indications  are  many  that  much  of  our 
present  scarcity  of  raw  materials  and  of  other 
material  resources  will  continue  to  weigh  heavily 
upon  production  for  some  years  to  come.  If  it 
does,  the  predicament  of  a  Socialist  movement 
which  may  have  jumped  into  the  saddle  during 
that  period  mil  be  a  sore  one.  It  will  be  expected 
to  increase  production,  to  increase  it  consider- 
ably and  to  increase  it  immediately.  But  to  meet 
that  expectation,  it  vill  be  faced  by  the  necessity 
of  increasing  production  only  through  continuing 
to  utilize  material  resources  which  for  the  sake 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    49 

of  increased  productivity  in  the  future  should  be 
at  once  conserved.  If  a  Socialist  administration 
should  yield  to  that  temptation,  its  day  of  reckon- 
ing might  be  postponed,  but  would  hang  over  it 
as  menacingly  as  the  sword  of  Damocles.  Sooner 
or  later  the  sword  would  fall,  and  with  it  would 
fall  the  Socialist  hopes.  Nothing  may  succeed  like 
success,  but  nothing  fails  like  failure.  On  the 
other  hand,  if  a  Socialist  administration  should 
not  yield  to  that  temptation,  it  may  grievously  dis- 
appoint the  hopes  wliieli  have  been  rested  in  it.  If 
those  hopes  have  been  artificially  stimulated  be- 
yond warrant,  again  indications  are  that  the 
Socialist  administration  will  fall.  Every  Social- 
ist who  would  think  his  problem  through  would 
therefore  do  well  to  recognize  that  again  cau,tion 
in  picturing  the  blessings  of  Socialism  is  de- 
manded. And  he  would  similarly  do  well  to  recog- 
nize that  it  is  by  no  means  beyond  the  realm  of 
probability  that  a  Socialist  state  will  finally 
achieve  stability  only  after  having  been  tried  and 
at  least  once  found  wanting. 

Finally,  mention  of  sufficient  supply  of  goods  in- 
volves some  mention  of  wages.  Discussion  of  the 
relation  between  wages  and  cost  of  commodities 
also  would  probably  follow  the  same  general  lines 
as  discussion  of  the  relation  between  hours  of 
labor  and  quantity  of  output.  For,  without  the 
presence  of  other  counteracting  factors,  and  un- 
less previous  wages  have  been  abnormally  low — 


50  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

far  lower  than,  on  the  whole,  they  are,  even  in 
purchasing  power,  in  the  United  States  today — 
wages  cannot  be  considerably  raised  without  rais- 
ing the  cost  of  commodities.  It  would  be  as  pat- 
ently illogical  to  maintain  that  the  wage-increases 
of  the  past  five  years  have  not  constituted 
one  of  the  causes  of  the  price-increases  of  that 
period  as  to  maintain  that  they  have  constituted 
the  sole  cause.  True,  the  effect  of  higher  wages, 
as  of  lower  hours,  should  be  ultimately  to  raise 
the  level  of  the  workers'  productivity;  but  as  in 
the  case  of  the  labor-force  available  to  the  com- 
munity, that  consummation  may  have  to  wait 
a  generation  for  its  large  realization.  Without 
the  presence  of  counteracting  factors,  the  Co- 
operative Commonwealth  will  discover,  in  the 
problem  of  wages  as  in  the  problem  of  hours  and 
material  resources,  a  limit  beyond  which  it  cannot 
eat  its  cake  and  have  it,  too. 

But  in  the  matter  of  wage-increases,  such  a 
counteracting  factor  will  be  present.  It  will  be 
the  elimination  of  the  almost  incredibly  high 
boosts  given  to  the  retail^  selling-prices  of  com- 
modities today  by  the  capitalist  system's  method* 
of  transferring  them  from  the  first  producer  to 
the  ultimate  consumer.  It  may  seriously  be 
doubted  if  the  profit  realized  by  the  actual  pro- 
ducer, even  where  it  is  indefensibly  high,  plays  a 
leading  role  in  the  final  cost  of  most  commodities. 
At  least,  in  most  production  the  percentage  of 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    51 

the  actual  selling-price  chargeable  against  profits, 
even  including  interest  on  private  capital  and 
rental  of  land,  ranks  far  below  the  percentage  of 
selling-price  chargeable  against  labor  and  the  cost 
of  raw  materials.  It  is  when  commodities  have 
once  left  the  hands  of  their  primary  producers 
that  in  most  cases  the  orgy  of  profit-taking  gets 
well  under  way.  Investigations  and  findings  of 
our  Federal  Trade  Commission  have  familiarized 
the  public  with  the  outrageous  percentage  of 
profits  recently  realized  by  the  retailer  in  the 
marketing  of  shoes,  for  example.  But  there  are 
many  indications  that  the  retail  merchants  of 
most  other  commodities  realize  a  profit  percentage 
almost  as  large  as,  or  at  least  one-half,  that  of 
the  shoe  dealers.  There  is  also  much  evidence 
that  even  in  pre-war  days  there  was  an  un- 
justifiably high  percentage  of  profit  normally 
realized  by  our  retailers  and  loaded  on  to  the 
purchaser  in  the  shape  of  heightened  prices. 

In  addition  to  the  increase  of  prices  from  this 
source,  there  is  that  due  to  the  profits  realized  by 
the  various  types  of  middlemen  and  jobbers,  inso- 
far as  their  efforts  are  dispensable  without  sub- 
stantial injury  to  the  processes  of  marketing  goods 
efficiently.  Even  where  their  efforts  are  hardly 
thus  dispensable  without  substantial  loss  of  ef- 
ficiency they  often  may  be  replaced  in  a  Socialist 
system  by  distributing  departments  of  the  state 
producing  industries,  operating  at  cost  instead  of 


52  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

at  profit.  And  there  are  other  promising  and 
promised  economies  possible  to  tho  distribution  of 
goods  when  it  is  handled  by  the  state.  Among 
them  is  the  elimination  of  much  rental  by  the 
utilization  of  public  buildings  vacant  for  certain 
portions  of  the  day  or  at  certain  times  of  the  year, 
such  as  armories,  schoolhouses  and  courthouses. 
Similarly,  there  is  available  for  use  in  state  distri- 
bution of  goods  from  the  producer  to  the  consumer 
much  state-owned  land,  not  only  parks,  but  also 
streets  that  may  without  loss  be  closed  to  traffic 
for  certain  periods  of  the  day,  and  military  camps, 
-forts  and  reservations.  The  consequent  savings 
from  all  these  sources  should  result  in  a  much 
closer  approximation  of  the  final  selling-cost  to 
the  original  production-cost  of  most  commodities 
than  now  obtains.  Without  attempting  to  chart 
these  factors  statistically,  it  may  safely  be  claimed 
that  there  is  at  least  healthy  promise  that  these 
tendencies  to  lower  the  general  price-level  of  com- 
modities in  a  Socialist  state  may  counterbalance 
the  tendency  to  raise  the  price-level  inherent  in 
a  wide-spread  and  substantial  increase  of  wages. 
Or,  to  put  the  statement  in  other  words,  the  wage- 
increases  which  must  bo  fulfilled  bv  a  Socialist  ad- 
ministration soon  after  its  accession  to  power  may 
result  without  raising  the  previous  money-rate 
jof  wages,  but  by  lowering  the  cost  of  commodities 
to  the  wage-earner,  and  thus  raising  the  actual 
purchasing  power  of  his  wages. 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    53 

However,  lest  it  be  feared  that  the  contemplated 
increase  of  production  under  Socialism  may  prove 
to  be  theoretically  demonstrable  rather  than 
actually  realizable,  let  us  postulate  that  the  factors 
tending  to  increase  Socialist  production  will  be 
balanced  by  factors  tending  to  decrease  it,  so  that 
the  amount  of  production  and  hence  the  total 
national  income  will  remain  the  same  under 
Socialism  as  urder  capitalism.  For  the  year 
1918,  Professor  B.  M.  Anderson,  Jr.,  economist  of 
the  Chase  National  Bank,  has  estimated  the  total 
national  income  of  the  United  States  to  be  $73,- 
400,000,000.  Professor  Friday's  estimate  is 
$72,000,000,000.  Another  estimate  of  our  national 
income  for  1918  now  being  carefully  made  tenta- 
tively places  it  at  at  least  $70,000,000,000.  By 
sheer  division,  that  amount  would  afford  to  each 
individual  American,  adult  or  child,  an  annual  in- 
come of  about  $700  annually;  and  thus  to  each 
mythical  average  family  of  man,  wife  and  three 
children  an  annual  income  of  $3500  in  1918.  Re- 
membering that  about  one-half  of  the  people  of 
the  United  States  live  in  rural  districts,  where 
the  cost  of  living  is  appreciably  lower  than  in  the 
non-rural  districts,  that  sum  is  equivalent  to  $3000 
annually  for  rural  families  and  $4000  annually 
for  urban  families  in  1918.^> 

But  even  the  strongest  Socialist  critic  of  the 
present  inequitable  distribution  of  wealth  under 
capitalism  does  not  anticipate  that  a  Socialist 


54  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

state  would  be  able  to  distribute  the  national 
income  almost  equitably.  It  is  generally  agreed 
in  most  Socialist  circles  that  the  different  grades 
of  wages  in  return  for  different  grades  of  work 
under  Socialism  may  have  to  vary  considerably. 
In  this  connection,  it  must  be  remembered  that 
the  elimination  of  our  higher  incomes  would  en- 
tail the  elimination  of  our  present  most  prolific 
source  of  payment  of  income  taxes.  The  tax  rate 
imposed  on  the  lower  incomes  would  then  have  to 
be  materially  raised.  It  might  be  objected  that  by 
the  time  of  the  advent  of  a  Socialist  state  the  tax 
burden  of  the  country,  at  present  due  largely  to 
our  participation  in  the  World  "War,  would  be 
greatly  lightened.  But  on  the  other  hand  it  would 
be  greatly  increased  by  the  cost  of  the  various  new 
social  welfare  and  Rural  Free  Delivery  type  of 
Government  enterprises,  some  of  which  a  Socialist 
administration,  no  matter  how  conservative, 
would  be  compelled  to  undertake.  Moreover,  all 
of  the  national  income  cannot  be  used  for  con- 
sumption. A  share  of  it  must  be  saved  in  order 
to  provide  for  increased  capital  equipment. 

However,  even  allowing  for  considerable  re- 
ductions from  the  $3000  annual  income  for  rural 
families  and  $4000  annual  income  for  urban  fami- 
lies, it  yet  seems  possible  to  guarantee  a  minimum 
family  income  sufficient  to  maintain  a  wholesome, 
socially-useful  and  even  happiness-producing 
standard  of  living.  The  purport  of  these  figures 


SOCIALISM  AND  QUANTITY  OF  PRODUCTION    55 

for  a  working-class  family  will  perhaps  best  be 
appreciated  by  comparing  them  with  union  scales 
of  wages.  In  1918,  according  to  the  reports  of  the 
Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics,  the  average  union 
scale  for  bricklayers  in  the  thirty-nine  most  im- 
portant industrial  centers  in  the  United  States 
was  $.80  an  hour  for  a  forty-four  hour  week.  For 
employment  without  a  day  off  and  without  over- 
time, this  is  at  the  rate  of  $1830  annually.  And 
union  bricklayers  are  among  the  highest-paid  of 
even  the  skilled  workers. 

As  for  1920,  the  annual  income  of  a  union  brick- 
layer working  without  one  day's  vacation  or  one 
hour's  overtime,  according  to  the  minimum  union 
scale  of  May  15,  1920,  was  about  $2600.  But  the 
value  of  the  dollar  in  June,  1918,  was  from  30 
per  cent  to  40  per  cent  higher  than  in  June,  1920. 
Hence  $3000  annual  income  and  $4000  annual  in- 
come in  1918  would  have  equaled  in  purchasing 
power  incomes  of  from  $3900  to  $5600  annually 
in  1920. 

The  value  of  the  dollar  being  about  12  per  cent 
higher  in  June,  1918,  than  in  June,  1919,  $4000 
annually  would  have  been  equivalent  to  about 
$4500  in  June,  1919.  And  the  United  States 
Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics  has  estimated  that  the 
annual  budget  necessary  to  maintain  a  family  of 
five  in  Washington,  D.  C., ' '  at  a  level  of  health  and 
decency,"  at  the  market  prices  prevailing  in  Au- 
gust, 1919,  was  $2260  annually.  Thus  it  appears 


66  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

that  if  through  conservatism  both  in  promising 
and  in  accomplishing  reduction  of  hours  and 
wages,  a  Socialist  administration  should  keep 
production  in  itslirst  years  at  the  same  volume 
as  previously,  there  should  be  possible  a  note- 
worthy improvement  in  the  material  fortunes  of 
the  great  bulk  of  ihe  populace.  That  even  if  pro- 
duction should  slightly  decrease,  general  material 
well-being  could  still  be  assured.  And  that  if 
sooner  or  later  the  Socialist  mode  of  production 
should  increase  to  any  marked  extent  the  total 
national  wealth  and  the  total  national  income,  the 
possibilities  of  improved  material  well-being  and 
facilities  for  leisure  for  the  bulk  of  the  people 
seem  well-nigh  limitless. 


CHAPTER  HI. 

4 

SOCIALISM    AND    GUILD    SOCIALISM, 

THE  weightiest  of  the  factors  playing  upon 
efficiency  of  production,  however,  has  yet  to  be 
considered.  That  is  the  attitude  of  the  worker  to 
his  work.  It  is  not  the  staunch  Socialist,  but  the 
staunch  capitalist,  who  admits,  or  rather  charges, 
that  Labor  renders  more  valuable  service  in  six 
hours  of  work  performed  with  a  lusty  willingness 
than  in  eight  hours  performed  reluctantly  and 
surlily.  The  good-will  of  the  workers  affects  not 
only  the  kind  and  the  extent  of  the  output.  It 
affects  also  the  presence  or  the  absence  of  econ- 
omies about  the  workshop  or  the  store,  the  strict 
{abolition  of  waste,  the  willingness  to  consider  sug- 
gestions for  improved  methods  and  the  invention 
of  new  devices.  And  it  is  by  no  means  the  least 
serious  of  the  indictments  levelled  by  Socialism 
against  capitalism  that  und^r  the  capitalist  system 
this  good-will  of  the  workers  can  seldom  operate 
in  industry.  So  Jong  as  the  workers'  role  is  mere- 
ly that  of  selling  their  labor  to  the  owners  and 
managers  of  industry,  so  long  will  they  withhold 
enthusiasm  and  willingness  trom  that  labor.  The 
defenders  of  the  capitalist  system  are  prone  to 

57 


68  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

insist  that  untrammeled  initiative,  attention  to  de- 
tails and  hostility  to  administrative  inefficiency 
are  not  poured  forth  by  the  individual  business 
man  when  he  no  longer  " works  for  himself" 
under  the  inducement  of  profits.  They  must  then 
admit  that  neither  will  these  qualities  be  poured 
forth  by  the  workers  when  the  workers,  in  spite 
of  their  strategic  importance  in  the  process  of 
production,  still  occupy  a  subordinate  position  in 
the  control  of  industry. 

It  is  more  than  a  matter  of  sharing  in  the  gen- 
eral well-being  of  the  industry,  more  than  a  mat- 
ter of  better  wages  for  better  work.  Of  this,  the 
failure  of  elaborate  systems  of  profit-sharing  and 
welfare  work  to  eradicate  the  economic  class- 
sullenness  of  the  workers  is  all  the  evidence  and 
proof  necessary.  Even  a  grudging  share  in  the 
minor  management  of  individual  business  units 
has  failed  to  stir  the  whole-hearted  enthusiasm  of 
Labor  for  its  job.  Some  of  the  more  advanced 
trade  unions  in  the  United  States,  such  as  the 
Amalgamated  Clothing  Workers,  arrived  during 
the  War  at  a  position  where  in  practise  they 
shared  in  the  minor  management  of  industry,  but 
it  was  still  only  minor  management,  and  the  joie 
de  travailler  could  not  thus  be  promulgated  among 
them.  For  the  answer,  one  must,  of  course,  turn 
to  human  nature  and  to  the  newer  psychology's 
analysis  of  human  nature.  For  good  or  ill,  man  is 
so  constituted  that  he  works  most  unwillingly 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  59 

when  he  is  working,  not  for  himself,  but  for 
another.  Only  when  Labor  can  feel  that  it  is  not 
working  for  Capital,  but  is  its  own  owner  and  its 
own  director  of  its  own  destiny  in  its  own  indus- 
try, only  then  will  Labor  render  the  best  service 
of  which  it  is  capable. 

True,  another  of  the  factors  playing  upon  this 
problem  must  be  heeded  in  this  connection. 
Human  nature  is  a  complex  and  tangled  skein  of 
motives,  and  man  possesses  an  instinct  of  work- 
manship no  less  than  an  instinct  of  independence. 
He  takes  joy  in  viewing  the  product  of  his  hands 
and  head,  and  in  pronouncing  it  good;  and  under 
those  circumstances  he  will  often  perform  the  best 
work  of  which  he  is  capable,  even  under  an  alien 
master  and  for  an  alien  owner.  In  many  of  our 
highly  skilled  trades,  where  specialization  cannot 
well  be  operative  to  so  high  a  degree  as  in  industry 
as  a  whole,  such  as  fine  jewelry  and  lithographing, 
the  worker  often  renders  his  best  service  through 
the  sheer  joy  of  craftsmanship. 

But  such  trades  are  the  exception,  rather  than 
the  rule.  Moreover,  they  are  constantly  growing 
scarcer.  Not  only  is  industry  for  the  greater 
part  becoming  increasingly  specialized,  but  also 
handicraft  work  is  yielding  more  and  more  to 
the  inroads  of  new  machinery.  Retracing  the 
steps  we  have  taken  on  the  road'to  specialization 
and  machine  industry  seems  to  be  impossible,  atj; 
least  for  the  immediate  future.  The  inevitable 


60  THE  LAEGEB  SOCIALISM 

result  of  such  retrogression  would  be  a  sharp  de- 
cline in  the  amount  of  output,  and  such  a  decline 
would  be  fatal  to  social  progress,  with  society's 
present  needs  in  the  way  of  material  production. 
Perhaps  after  several  generations  of  Socialism, 
production  may  become  so  proficient  and  so  pro- 
lific that  a  return  to  a  large  measure  of  handi- 
craft work  would  be  possible.  Several  genera- 
tions of  Socialism  may  so  cheapen  the  cost  of 
production,  so  magnify  the  quantity  of  output, 
and  so  lower  the  daily  hours  of  labor  that  society 
can  afford  to  absorb  a  more  expensive  mode  of 
production,  a  less  plentiful  output  and  an  aug- 
mented work-day  in  return  for  the  thrill  which 
will  possess  its  workers  in  a  fuller  satisfaction  of 
their  instinct  of  workmanship.  But  in  view  of  the 
preceding  discussion  on  the  problems  of  produc- 
tion confronting  a  Socialist  state,  profound  scep- 
ticism as  to  the  early  practicability  of  such  a  pro- 
gram may  not  seem  unwarranted. 

Indeed,  if  the  United  States  has  been  accurately 
informed  of  the  later  development  of  the  guild 
socialist  movement  in  England,  guild  socialism 
has  abandoned  much  of  the  emphasis  it  originally 
had  laid  upon  a  return  to  the  productive  processes 
of  the  William  Morris  craftsmen,  the  eighteenth 
century  domestic  workers  and  the  medieval  guild 
master,  workmen  and  apprentices.  By  the  exi- 
gencies of  modern  industry,  most  national  guilds- 
men  seem  to  have  been  compelled,  reluctantly,  but 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  61 

inexorably,  to  admit  that  the  days  when  individ- 
ual workmen  fashioned  most,  if  not  all,  of  their 
product  themselves  are  for  the  present  irrevoca- 
ble. They  now  seem  to  put  their  appeal  chiefly 
on  a  group,  rather  than  on  an  individual,  basis. 
Most  national  guildsmen  now  are  understood  to 
maintain  that  only  through  the  guild  socialistic 
organization  of  the  state  will  Labor  as  a  class, 
not  the  individual  laborer  except  as  a  member  of 
this  class,  develop  the  spirit  of  good-will  and  en- 
thusiasm for  its  task  which  spells  not  only  the 
maximum  happiness  of  Labor,  but  also  the  maxi- 
mum efficiency  of  production  as  an  entirety. 

For  guild  socialism  indicts  Socialism  no  less 
than  capitalism.  To  the  national  guildsman,  the 
Socialist  remedy  for  capitalism's  failure  to  en- 
list the  full  interest  of  the  worker  in  his  job  also 
spells  failure.  The  Socialist  remedy,  of  course, 
especially  before  the  World  War,  was  the  Govern- 
ment operation  as  well  as  ownership  of  important 
industry.  The  Government  would  be  the  work- 
ers, so  that  Government  ownership  and  operation 
of  industry  would  be  workers'  ownership  and 
operation  of  industry.  But,  as  the  guild  sin  an  per- 
tinently suggests,  it  is  by  no  means  axiomatic 
"that,  even  under  Socialism,  the  Government  will 
be  the  workers.  At  least,  it  is  not  axiomatic 
that  the  Government  will  be  the  workers  to 
such  an  extent,  and  in  so  readily  transfer- 
able a  technique  of  administration,  that  a  So- 


62  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

cialist  Government  will  ipso  facto  constitute 
workers'  control  and  ownership  of  industry. 
If  Socialism  had  remained  Marxism,  doubtless 
the  guild  socialist  indictment  would  have  lost 
much  of  its  pertinence.  For  the  Marxian  analyses 
called  for  a  revolution  with  proletariat  pitted 
against  bourgeoisie.  Although  eventually  all 
would  be  proletarians,  yet  an  interval  would  en- 
sue in  which  bourgeois  would  persist  before  be- 
coming completely  proletarianized,  and  in  which 
they  would  necessarily  have  to  be  suppressed. 
The  class  alignment  would  thus  also  persist  for 
a  period,  and^he  Socialistic  Government  might 
thus  be  trusted  to  function  as  a  purely  proleta- 
rian Government. 

But  since  revisionist  Socialism  is  predominant 
over  Marxism  in  Anglo-Saxon  lands,  plans  for 
evolution  are  predominant  over  plans  for  revolu- 
tion; and  a  Socialist  Government  cannot  function 
as  a  class  Government  so  rigidly  as  to  assure  the 
workers  in  Government  industry  that  they  will  be- 
come overnight  the  masters  of  their  own  industrial 
destiny.  The  guildsman  points  to  state  capitalism, 
or  state  socialism,  during  the  "War  as  evidence  that 
the  state  as  owner  and  manager  may  prove  little 
improvement,  if,  indeed,  not  a  deterioration,  upon 
the  individual  capitalist  or  the  capitalist  corpora- 
tion as  owner  and  manager.  Accordingly,  his  solu- 
tion of  a  dual  state,  organized  both  for  consump- 
tion and  for  production,  presents  many  allure- 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  63 

ments.  Under  guild  socialism,  the  worker  as  an 
individual,  that  is,  as  a  consumer,  would  owe  al- 
legiance to  political  bodies  organized  for  con- 
sumption. In  distribution,  as  in  police  power, 
coinage  and  foreign  relations,  the  political  bodies 
would  reign  supreme. '•But  the  worker  as  a  worker, 
that  is,  as  a  producer,  would  owe  allegiance  to 
the  guild  or  union  in  that  particular  industry 
which  claimed  him.  In  that  industry,  the  guild 
would  reign  supreme,  and  the  central  congress  of 
guilds  would  reign  supreme  in  industry  as  a 
whole.  The  worker  in  each  industry  would  thus 
be  subject  to  the  control  of  only  his  fellow-work- 
ers in  that  industry,  instead  of  to  the  control  of  a 
central  political  state  presumably  representing  the 
entire  citizenry.  Labor  as  Labor  would  thus  be 
independent  of  outside  control,  and  would  con- 
ceivably bring  to  its  task  a  good-will  and  en- 
thusiasm not  obtainable  when  it  would  be  work- 
ing for  the  political  state,  of  which  it  might  be 
only  a  minor,  vaguely-defined  and  comparatively 
uninfluential  element.  (It  should  be  added  that 
the  most  recent  authoritative  guild  socialist 
thought  tends  more  and  more  to  limit  this  sov- 
ereignty of  the  guilds,  even  in  industry,  in  favor 
of  community  control;  and  that  one  of  the  most 
prominent  spokesmen  of  the  national  guilds  idea 
looks  forward  to  the  death,  through  atrophy,  of 
the  political  state  as  at  present  organized.  In- 
deed, it  is  difficult  to  appraise  the  guild  idea  un- 


64  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

derstandingly  because  of  differences  of  opinion 
among  its  exponents  on  vital  issues;  frequent 
change  in  position ;  and  confessed  lack  of  definite- 
ness  on  many  points  concerning  the  organization 
of  a  guild  socialist  state.) 

^  Extended  analysis  of  the  guild  idea  as  applied 
to  conditions  in  the  United  States  would  doubtless 
be  superfluous,  if  not  impertinent.  For  not  only 
has  guild  socialism,  in  its  present  form,  been 
evolved  primarily  in  Great  Britain  to  meet  Brit- 
ish conditions — it  also  will  probably  receive  its 
first  application,  if  it  receives  any  application,  in 
Great  Britain  long  before  an  application  in  the 
United  States  will  be  possible.  For,  industrially, 
Labor  is  far  more  extensively  and  effectively  or- 
ganized in  Great  Britain  than  in  the  United 
States,  and  politically  it  is  ably  organized  in 
the  British  Labor  Party.  "While  in  the  United 
States  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  is 
a  non-political  body;  the  Farmer-Labor  Party 
is  still  an  embryo;  the  Non-Partisan  League  is 
more  of  an  agrarian  than  a  Labor  movement ;  and 
the  Socialist  Party  of  America  is  infinitely  fur- 
ther removed  from  the  seat  of  power  than  the  Brit- 
ish Labor  Party.  Furthermore,  British  Labor  is 
far  better  mentally  equipped  than  American.,  It 
has  developed  greater  administrative  skill,  both 
in  trade  union  activities  and  in  general  Govern- 
mental endeavor.  Again,  British  political  thought 
and  practise  have  not  sanctioned  the  dominance 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  65 

of  the  entire  political  state  over  the  rights  of  in- 
dividuals and  the  rights  of  subsidiary  groups  to 
the  same  pervasive  extent  as  have  American 
thought  and  practise.  Above  all,  guild  socialism 
should  be  at  present  more  applicable  to  industry 
than  to  agriculture,  especially  since  industrial 
Labor  is  everywhere  far  more  thoroughly  organ- 
ized than  agricultural  Labor;  and  Great  Britain 
is  more  of  an^industrial  nation  than  the  United 
States,  where  almost  40  %  of  the  population  is  still 
rural  and  where  tenant  farming,  the  rule  in  Eng- 
land, is  still,  despite  its  recent  rapid  growth,  the 
exception.  (The  1920  census  showed  only  52% 
of  the  population  of  the  United  States  living  in  in- 
corporated cities  or  towns  of  2,500  inhabitants 
or  more,  9%  living  in  incorporated  places  of  less 
than  2,500  inhabitants,  and  39%  living  in  what  the 
Census  Bureau  calls  rural  districts.)  Guild  social- 
ism might  succeed  in  Great  Britain  and  later  fail 
in  the  United  States;  if  it  should  fail  in  Great 
Britain,  its  failure  in  the  United  States  could  be 
predicted  with  almost  absolute  confidence. 

Nevertheless,  at  this  point  some  criticism  of  the 
guild  socialist  idea  may  not  prove  irrelevant  in 
considering  the  general  problem  of  the  efficiency  of 
the  Socialist  program  in  stimulating  production. 
In  the  first  place,  it  is  obvious  that  much  support 
given  the  guildsman  's  indictment  of  the  treatment 
of  Labor  in  Government  industry  arose  from  dis- 
satisfaction at  war  conditions.  Those  war  condi- 


66  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

tions  presented  to  the  Government  the  opportu- 
nity to  impose,  or  possibly  the  necessity  of  impos- 
ing, many  restrictions  upon  its  Labor  which  would 
be  unavailable  in  peace-time.  Even  if  the  politi- 
cal state  were  normally  as  vicious  an  employer  and 
manager  as  the  national  guildsman  maintains, 
nevertheless  only  in  war-times  could  it  forbid  its 
workers  to  leave  one  form  of  employment  in  order 
to  enter  another,  or  one  factory  in  the  same  trade 
for  another,  for  instance.  In  time  of  peace,  the 
political  state  as  employer  could  not  enforce  arbi- 
trary decrees  upon  its  workers  by  threatening 
them  with  the  trenches  as  the  alternative  to  im- 
plicit obedience.  Public  opinion  would  not  toler- 
ate arbitrary  handling  of  the  workers  in  peace  as 
it  tolerated  arbitrary  handling  of  them  in  war; 
and  the  workers,  by  their  organization  as  workers, 
would  be  more  prone  and  better  able  to  resist  such 
arbitrariness  than  they  were  prone  and  able  from 
1914  to  1919. 

In  the  second  place,  the  political  state  as  em- 
ployer and  as  manager  during  the  War  was  still 
a  political  state  with  leaders  who  were  imbued  with 
the  capitalist  point  of  view  and  who  followed  the 
capitalist  philosophy  as  their  guiding-star.  In 
other  words,  the  great  majority  of  the  population 
had  not  yet  been  educated  or  had  not  yet  educated 
itself  out  of  the  capitalist  ideology  into  the  social- 
ist. But  before  a  Socialist  state  can  be  estab- 
lished, at  least  by  the  politically  democratic  pro- 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  67 

cesses  which  Anglo-Saxon  countries  seem  to  im- 
pose upon  their  Socialist  movements,  the  great 
majority  of  the  population,  including  the  over- 
whelming majority  of  the  workers,  will  have  to  be 
converted  to  the  Socialist  program.  Thus  not  only 
will  the  leaders  of  the  Socialist  state  be  neces- 
sarily permeated  with  the  Socialist  point  of  view, 
as  contrasted  with  leaders  of  the  capitalist  state 
who  still  grudge  to  Labor  the  concessions  they 
are  compelled  to  grant  it,  and  who  concentrate 
upon  the  problem  of  the  welfare  of  the  workers 
not  one  more  moment  of  attention  than  they  are 
compelled  to  concentrate.  But  also  the  leaders 
of  the  Socialist  state  will  have  back  of  their  ad- 
ministration a  public  opinion  which  will  not  toler- 
ate the  moral  and  material  exploitation  of  the 
workers  characteristic  of  the  British  Govern- 
ment, supported  by  capitalist  public  opinion,  as 
employer  and  manager- during  the  War.  Even  the 
peace-time  activities  of  the  state  which  might  be 
termed  state  socialism  are  activities  pursued  by  a 
capitalist,  not  by  a  Socialist,  state.  A  few  forms 
of  Socialism  within  the  capitalist  system  are  in 
no  sense  fairly  representative  of  Socialism  as  a 
whole,  and  indictments  of  Socialism  drawn  only 
from  those  forms  are  inadequate  indictments. 

Similarly,  resentment  against  whatever  degree 
of  bureaucracy  adheres  to  state  ownership  and 
management  of  industry  may  well  be  lessened 
as  the  worker's  hours  of  labor  are  lessened. 


68  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

Procedure  which  appears  intolerable  in  a  nine- 
hour  work-day  may  be  viewed  much  more  tolerant- 
ly in  a  seven-hour  work-day.  Much  of  the  work- 
~er's  resentment  is  generated  in  the  last  two  hours 
of  his  day's  work,  and  may  well  disappear  when 
those  two  hours  are  released  from  the  necessity  of 
laboring,  and  are  devoted  to  leisure  or  recreation 

which  will  tend  to  banish  the  remembrance  of  his 

it 

job — if  one  admit  that  even  under  guild  socialism 
much  work  must  still  be  irksome  or  most  work 
must  still  be  irksome"  to  a  degree. 

In  the  third  place,  the  present  organization  of 
the  workers  as  workers  will  carry  over  into  the 
Socialist  state.  Indeed,  it  may  safely  be  assumed 
that  if  mojst.of  the  workers  should  become  suffi- 
ciently imbued  with  the  political  doctrines  of 
Socialism  to  vote  the  Socialist  ticket,  they  will 
have  become  sufficiently  indoctrinated  with  the 
principles  of  trade  unionism  to  increase  the  num- 
ber, the  sizer  and  the  strength  of  their  unions. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  Socialist  conception  and 
program  to  inhibit  trade  unions  under  Socialism 
— indeed,  many  of  the  most  far-visioned  Socialists 
welcome  the  activities  of  trade  unions  under  So- 
cialism, even  though  the  unions  may  conceivably 
on  occasion  find  it  necessary  to  oppose  the  politi- 
cal Socialist  state.  So  far  from  trying  to  forbid 
strikes,  by  injunction  or  by  other  methods,  a  wise 
Socialist  state  would  assume  that  the  threat  of 
a  strike  could  be  taken  as  demanding  an  inquiry 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  69 

into  possibly  unjust  conditions,  and  that  the  pres- 
ence of  unions  would  be  a  wholesome  corrective 
against  state  exploitation  of  Labor.  Against  the 
Socialist  state  as  employer,  the  strike  would 
become  a  more  potent  weapon  than  even  against 
a  private  employer  under  the  capitalist  system; 
and  it  is  thus  difficult  to  appreciate  why  many  of 
the  evils  of  state  control  of  industry  of  which  the 
national  guildsman  complains  could  not  be  reme- 
died by  the  industrial  action  of  the  workers  against 
the  political  state,  without  gping  so  far  as  to  limit 
the  supremacy  of  the  state  in  the  entire  structure 
of  society. 

In  the  fourth  place,  muchfof  the  autocracy  now 
charged  against  the  politicaj  state  as  owner  and 
manager  is  due,  not  to  the  inherent  nature  of  the 
political  state,  but  to  its  present  geographical  or- 
ganization. At  present,  the  delegate  chosen  from 
each  of  the  state's  geographical  subdivisions  is  ex- 
pected to  represent  all  the  constituents  of  that 
division,  whatever  the  economic  classes  to  which 
they  belong.  If  the  constituency  be  composed  of 
many  economic  classes,  as  are  most  of  our  urban 
constituencies,  in  practise- the  delegate  is  usually 
found  to  represent  the  most  powerfully-organized 
class  in  it.  With  still  only  the  minority  of  the 
workers  in  the  United  States  so  organized  as  to 
make  their  political  influence  effective,  the  dele- 
gate in  most  cases  today  thus  represents  the'  eco- ' 
nomic  interests  of  the  bourgeoisie.  Even  in  the 


70  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

rural  districts,  except  in  the  newly-awakened 
Northwest,  where  the  economic  class  lines  are  apt 
to  be  homogeneous,  the  bourgeoisie,  by  social  pres- 
sure, by  control  of  the  sources  from  which  pub- 
lic opinion  derives,  and  by  the  indirect  rather  than 
the  direct  influence  of  its  economic  position,  usual- 
ly manages  to  have  the  selected  delegate  represent 
the  bourgeois  point  of  view.  Nothing  could  dem- 
onstrate the  inadequacy  of  the  geographical  or- 
ganization of  the  state  more  tellingly  than  the  fact 
that  even  our  rural  districts  in  most  cases  choose 
lawyers  to  represent  them  at  Washington.  Not 
seldom  lias  it  been  suggested  that  the  Senate  of 
the. United  States,  even  as  it  fills  page  after  page 
of  the  Congressional  Record  with  denunciations 
of  Soviet  Russia,  in  itself  constitutes  a  lawyers* 
soviet. 

It  is  unnecessary  here  to  analyze  the  reasons  for 
this  supremacy  of  the  upper  and  the  middle  class 
points  of  view  in  our  legislative  halls,  however 
patent  and  demonstrable  the  reasons  may  be.  It 
is  sufficient  merely  to  glance  at  our  elected  Repre- 
sentatives in  the  legislative,  executive  and  judicial 
branches  of  our  Government  in  order  to*  realize 
that  the  economic  strata  they  represent  do  not 
square  with  the  economic  strata  of  the  people  who 
elect  them.  There  is  room  for  argument  as  to 
whether  the  middle  economic  class  or  the  working- 
class  is  more  numerous  in  the  United  States,  but' 
certainly  there  is  no  disputing  that  the  upper  class 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  71 

is  not  the  most  numerous.  Yet  just  as  certainly 
there  can  be  little  disputing  that  the  most  numer- 
ous class  in  Congress  is  the  upper  class,  upper 
class  whether  in  economic  position  or  in  intellec- 
tual and  emotional  avenue  of  approach  to  the 
problems  confronting  the  nation.  Whatever  the 
causes,  geography  as  the  structural  basis  for  the 
political  state  has  been  found  lamentably  favor- 
able to  the  upper  classes. 

One  need  not  be  a  Marxian  to  realize  that  the 
economic  alignment  is  a  more  accurate,  more  truly 
representative  and  more  effective  basis  for  organ- 
izing the  political  state  than  the  geographical 
alignment.  Even  the  most  opportunist  evolution- 
ary or  revisionist  Socialist  must  recognize  that 
the  individual's  economic  status  furnishes  the  key 
to  the  explanation  of  his  conduct,  even  though  he 
may  not  assign  to  economic  status  the  well-nigh 
omnipotent  influence  t£at  the  Marxian  assigns  to 
it.  Indeed,  for  the  recognition  of  that  fact,  one 
need  not  be  a  Socialist  at  all,  Marxian  and  revo- 
lutionary, or  non-Marxian  and  evolutionary.  The 
man  in  the  street,  if  the  problem  were  placed  be- 
fore him,  not  in  Marxian,  nor  in  economic,  nor  in 
political  philosophic  phraseology,  but  in  the 
phraseology  of  the  street,  would  agree  that  the 
economic  line-up  is  the  fundamental  line-up.  If 
the  political  state  is  to  be  truly  representative  of 
the  life  of  the  community  over  which  it  is  sover- 


72 

eign,  it  must  alter  its  geographic  structure  in 
favor  of  an  occupational  one;. 

It  may  then  be  seriously  questioned  if  much 
of  the  fear  inspired  in  the  national  guildsman  at 
the  prospect  of  the  political  state  as  the  owner 
and  manager  of  industry  would  not  vanish  if  the 
political  state  should  be  organized  along  occupa- 
tional lines.  For  instance,  no  class  of  workers  is 
more  mercilessly  exploited  in  private  industry  in 
the  United  States  today  than  the  workers  in  our 
postal  system,  a  socialistic  enterprise  in  a  capi- 
talistic state.  But  even  if  their  lot  should  not  be 
lightened  under  a  Socialistic  state,  and  even  if 
their  exploitation  should  persist  after  they  had 
become  industrially  so  well  organized  as  the  rail- 
road locomotive  engineers  or  the  anthracite  min- 
ers— as  well  they  might  be — even  then  they  might 
not  without  reason  look  for  relief  to  an  occupa- 
tionally-chosen  Government.  Such  a  Government 
would  be  organized  from  a  Congress  or  from  an 
electoral  college  in  which  the  proportion  of  work- 
ers' representatives  would  be  as  high  as  the  pro- 
portion of  workers  in  the  entire  population.  Un- 
der a  Government  thus  organized,  there  is  little 
likelihood  that  even  political  expediency  or  ad- 
ministrative shortsightedness  could  subject  the 
postal  employees  to  the  prejudices  of  a  Southern 
Bourbon  mind,  to  which,  in  all  fairness,  much  of 
their  present  plight  is  due.  Even  if  an  occupa- 
tional census  should  show  the  workers  not  in  an 


73 

absolute  majority,  yet  it  would  also  show  the 
upper-class,  which  at  present  is  the  majority  mind 
of  our  Government,  in  a  distinct  minority.  From 
a  Government  including,  say,  only  thirty  per. cent 
workers,  twenty  per  cent  farmers  and  ten  per  cent 
farm  tenants  and  agricultural  laborers,  the  postal 
employees  might  be  expected  to  receive  fairer 
treatment.  At  all  events,  it  may  perhaps  not  ir- 
relevantly be  suggested  to  the  national  guilds- 
men'  tha£  they  might  well  give  a  fair  trial  to  the 
sovereign  political  state  organized  occupationally 
before  insisting  on  so  altogether  a  revolutionary 
upset  of  our  present  political  conceptions  as  a  dual 
sovereignty  of  producer  and  consumer  within  the 
nation. 

In  the  fifth  place,  if  guild  socialism  is  to  become 
effective,  it  must  become  effective  in  all  industry 
at  practically  the  same  time.  It  is  difficult  to 
conceive  of  a  guild  state  functioning  successfully 
where  one  section  of  its  Labor  would  be  yield- 
ing allegiance  partly  to  the  guild  and  the  cen- 
tral guild  congress,  while  another  section  would 
^etill  be  existing  under  a  single  allegiance, 
both  for  production  and  for  consumption,  to 
the  political  state.  Now,  the  difficulty  here 
arising  is  that  of  varying  degrees  of  administra- 
tive ability  among  the  various  workers  in  the 
various  trades.  Let  it  be  granted  that  the  Amal- 
gamated Clothing  Workers  could  quite  satisfac- 
torily handle  all  the  problems  of  the  clothing  in- 


74  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

dustry,  the  coal  miners  the  coal  industry,  the  rail- 
road brotherhoods  the  railroads.  Yet  the  work- 
ers in  other  trades,  in  all  frankness,  are  far  from 
having  attained  the  sheer  intelligence  required 
completely  to  administer  those  trades.  By  and 
large,  the  more  intelligent  workers  tend  to  gravi- 
tate to  the  more  highly- skilled  trades.  Where 
they  might  be  successful  in  taking  over  the  control 
of  their  trades,  their  less  intelligent  and  more  un- 
skilled fellows  might  well  be  unsuccessful.  To 
sacrifice  delicacy  to  definiteness,  can  the  impartial 
observer  rest  assured  that  our  iron  and  steel 
workers  can  be  as  successfully  entrusted  with  our 
steel  mills  as  our  railroad  workers  with  our  rail- 
roads ? 

The  guildsman  may  object  that  the  worker  will 
develop  with  responsibility — indeed,  can  develop 
only  by  responsibility.  But  one  has  only  to  look 
at  the  decisions  of  our  political  electorate  to  ap- 
preciate how  slowly  most  of  us  grow  up  to  our 
civic  responsibilities.  Even  the  most  orthodox 
worshipper  at  the  shrine  of  political  democracy" 
must  regretfully  confess  that  many  of  the  earlier 
ardent  hopes  reposed  in  the  practise  of  political 
democracy  have  proved  fictitious.  Democracy 
may  remain  the  most  satisfactory  method  of  at- 
taining the  political  decisions  of  the  state,  but  it  is 
by  no  means  as  free  from  error  and  mischief  as  our, 
forefathers  were  prone  to  imagine.  It  did  not  need 
the  War  to  demonstrate  that  the  political  decisions 


75 

of  the  electorate  in  the  first  decade  of  the  twentieth 
century  seem  not  much  wiser  than  those  of  the  first 
decade  of  the  nineteenth.  True,  it  may  be  insisted 
that  the  act  of  voting  on  political  matters  is  not 
fairly  to  be  compared  with  the  act  of  voting  on  in- 
dustrial matters.  As  will  be  suggested  later,  de- 
cisions of  the  electorate  in  the  political  field  are 
far  less  important  than  decisions  in  the  industrial 
field.  The  mistakes  are  less  serious,  affect  the 
voters  less  intimately,  and  are  less  clearly  recog- 
nizable. The  influence  of  the  state's  political  ac-r 
tivities  upon  the  daily  life  and  welfare  of  the  in- 
dividual voter  is  usually  indirect  and  secondary; 
the  influence  of  the  state's  industrial  activities 
upon  the  voter's  welfare  is  graphically  brought 
home  to  him  in  almost  every  hour  of  his  work- 
ing day.  Economic  conditions  are  all-important, 
but  are  guided  only  slightly  by  political  conditions, 
and  four  years  of  an  inept  Presidential  adminis- 
tration are — four  years  of  an  inept  Presidential 
administration. 

But  there  is  another  distinction  between  demo- 
cratic control  of  political  life  and  democratic  con- 
trol of  industrial  life.  Just  because  decisions  in 
the  political  field  are  relatively  insignificant,  the 
mistakes  of  the  electorate  in  those  decisions  are  of 
relatively  little  moment.  If  it  is  from  their  politi- 
cal mistakes  that  the  voters  learn,  in  most  cases 
little  harm  will  have  been  wrought.  But  mistakes 
in  control  of  industry  are  by  no  means  to  be  taken 


76  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

so  lightly.  Four  years  of  an  inept  administra- 
tion of  a  keynote  industry  are  much  more  than 
merely  four  years  of  an  inept  administration.  Po- 
litical administration  is  a  thick-skinned  organism 
which  is  not  easily  injured,  and  which  can  usually 
afford  to  get  ahead  somehow  by  the  process  of 
muddling  through;  but  industry  today  is  a  high- 
ly delicate  and  vulnerable  mechanism — sharp 
blunders  in  its  management  may  result  in  wide- 
spread and  long-spread  injuries  which  will  en- 
gr.ave  deep  and  painful  scars,  if  not  crippling 
mutilations,  on  the  entire  community.  An  unre- 
liable electorate  in  industry  cannot  enjoy  the  same 
lengthy  opportunity  to  become  reliable  through  -. 
its  many  mistakes  as  can  an  unreliable  electorate 
in  politics. 

Similarly,  it  might  be  objected  that  the  voters' 
political  decisions  have  not  seemed  to  wax  wiser 
with  the  generations  because  the  political  problems 
with  which  they  have  been  confronted  have  waxed 
more  complicated  with  the  generations.  But  the 
retort  is  obvious — the  problems  confronting  indus- 
try are  likewise  constantly  becoming  more  com- 
plicated with  the  generations,  and  will  increasingly 
require  greater  intelligence  from  an  industrial 
electorate. 

Finally,  Guild  Socialism  may  easily  develop 
dangers  direr  than  those  which  it  seeks  to  remedy. 
In  meeting  one  demand  of  human  nature  which  it 
claims  simon-pure  Socialism  neglects,  it  may  it- 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  77 

self  be  neglecting  another  demand  of  human  na- 
ture no  less  deep-rooted  than  the  first.  In  try- 
ing to  mold  a  system  of  society  which  will  meet 
man's  instinct  of  independence  in  work,  it  may 
be  molding  a  system  which  will  pamper  to  man's 
instinct  of  "selfish  aggrandisement.  For  man  can 
no  longer  be  regarded  as  the  shining  sun  of  reason 
and  high  purpose  which  the  purely  economic  phi- 
losophers were  prone  to  depict.  We  have  begun  to 
study  him  coolly  and  critically,  and  we  find  him  in 
no  sense  entitled  to  any  foreordained  and  es- 
pecially-reserved place  in  nature.  Not  only  is  man 
imperfect,  but  his  imperfection  is  inextricably 
wrought  up  with  the  sad  imperfection  of  this  mun- 
dane universe.  Not  only  is  he  a  creature  of  crude 
Demotions  and  animal  instincts,  as  well  as  of  men- 
tality; but  also  his  emotions  and  instincts  are 
highly  developed  while  his  mentality  is  but  slightly  ^ 
developed,  and  he  is  guided  by  his  emotions  and 
instincts  nine  times  for  once  that  he  is  guided  by 
his  mind.  On  the  whole,  he  may  still  be  regarded 
as  the  highest  of  the  animals,  but  he  is  not  so 
widely  separated  from  the  next  highest  as  to  af- 
ford him  grounds  for  complacency.  In  a  few 
respects,  man  is  lower  than  some  of  the  other  ani- 
mals, and  on  occasions  he  lowers  himself  beneath 
many  of  them — few  of  the  species  of  the  animal 
kingdom  ever  behave  toward  themselves  or  toward 
other  species  as  man  behaved  toward  himself  dur- 
ing and  after  the  World  War. 


78  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

Few  attacks  hurled  against  Socialism  prove 
themselves  so  futile  as  the  argument  that  Social- 
ism is  impossible  because  of  the  imperfection  of 
human  nature.  But  the  argument  is  futile,  not 
because  the  emphasis  on  human  nature  is  not  over- 
whelmingly relevant,  but  because  it  would  be  ap- 
plied more  fittingly  to  the  present  capitalist  sys- 
tem than  to  a  socialist  system.  It  is  the  capitalist 
system  which  is  failing  because  of  man 's  inherent 
selfishness.  For  the  weakness  of  capitalism  is 
that  it  tempts  man  to  yield  to  his  selfish  impulses 
by  the  lure  of  profit,  hoping  in  vain  that  his  altru- 
ism will  guard  him  from  surrender  to  the  temp- 
tation. Capitalism  is  failing  just  because  it  pre- 
sents too  many  occasions  when  the  individual's 
personal  gain  conflicts  with  the  gain  of  the  entire 
community,  too  few  occasions  when  the  individ- 
ual's personal  advancement  happens  to  coincide 
with  the  advancement  of  the  entire  community. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  the  virtue  of  the  Social- 
ist movement  that  it  is  built  on  the  assumption  of 
the  essential  weakness  of  human  nature.  The 
Socialist  program  is  so  framed  as  to  deliver  the 
individual  from  economic  temptation  so  far  as  he 
can  be  delivered.  The  Socialist  conception  of  the 
economic  organization  of  society  abolishes  the 
system  whereby  man  may  be  tempted  by  the  lure 
of  profits  to  advance  at  the  expense  of  his  fellow- 
man.  It  substitutes  a  system  whereby  he  is  re- 
warded in  proportion  to  the  direct  benefit  he  con- 


f 


79 

fers  upon  his  fellows,  the  higher  rewards  for  the 
higher  benefits  and  the  lower  rewards  for  the 
lower  benefits.  It  is  Socialism,  not  capitalism, 
which  cherishes  no  illusions  regarding  the  weak- 
ness of  man's  altruism  and  the  strength  of  man's 
selfishness. 

But  Guild  Socialism  would  seem  to  lay  itself 
seriously  open  to  the  charge  of  failing  adequately 
to  appreciate  the  need  for  a  system  of  society 
which  will  hold  our  selfish  impulses  in  check. 
Guild  Socialism  would  diminish  the  danger  that 
the  individual  would  be  tempted  to  exploit  society, 
but  it  would  keep  alive  the  danger  that  the  sep- 
arate guild  or  group  of  guilds  would  be  tempted 
to  exploit  it.  Under  Socialism  proper,  the  individ- 
ual's progress  toward  prosperity  would  lie  along 
the  road  of  benefiting  the  entire  community;  un- 
der Guild  Socialism,  the  individual's  progress 
toward  prosperity  would  lie  along  the  road  of 
the  aggrandisement  of  his  particular  guild.  Anjl 
the  aggrandisement  of  the  individual  guild  might 
well  conflict  with  the  aggrandisement  of  the  en- 
tire community — the  fewer  hours  the  guild  would 
work  and  the  higher  wages  it  would  receive, 
the  better  for^its  members.  Guild  Socialism 
would  offer  to  a  group  the  same  temptation  to 
rise  to  affluencfc  through  injury  to  the  entire  body 
politic  that  capitalism  offers  to  the  individual 
business  man  or  private  corporation.  Capitalism 
has  failed  because  the  individual  man  has  proved 


80  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

too  weak  a  vessel  to  withstand  that  temptation; 
what  guaranty  can  Guild  Socialism  offer  that  the 
individual  guild  will  be  able  to  rise  superior  to  it? 
For  the  checks  suggested  by  the  Guild  Social- 
ists which  would  thwart  selfish  impulses  of  the 
guilds,  separately  or  as  a  group,  must  seem  all 
too  impotent  to  one  who  regretfully  insists  that 
such  impulses  would  be  both  numerous  and 
powerful. 

Consider,  for  example — as  Graham  Wallas  has 
recently  asked  an  American  audience  to  consider 
in  this  connection — the  teachers  in  our  public 
schools.  In  view  of  the  accelerated  failure  of  pres- 
ent-day society  to  attract  its  more  advanced  types 
into  teaching,  it  is  easy  to  wax  cynical  at  the  teach- 
ing profession.  It  is  no  difficult  matter  to  convict 
the  teachers  of  unintelligence  in  the  calling  in 
which  intelligence  is  the  prime  necessity,  to  depict 
them  as  almost  so  deeply  in  need  of  learning  as 
those  who  sit  at  their  feet.  And  yet,  after  having 
indulged  the  taste  for  cynicism  at  the  expense  of 
the  teachers,  it  is  impossible  not  to  admit  that 
they  are  at  least  as  intelligent  as  the  members 
of  other  callings.  If  it  be  true  that  most  teach- 
ers have  drifted  into  their  work  because  no  other 
work  lay  so  readily  accessible  to  them,  and  if  it 
be  true  that  most  of  them  would  adopt  other  work 
if  they  would  prosper  thereby,  yet  it  is  likewise 
true  that  most  persons  in  other  callings  have  also 
drifted  into  them,  and  would  abandon  them  in 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  81 

favor  of  other  activities,  if  they  could  thereby 
prosper.  Teaching,  moreover,  is  essentially  a 
socialistic  function  of  a  capitalist  state.  There 
is  nothing  of  profit-making  about  it ;  and,  in  spite 
of  the  benefits  to.be  derived,  as  in  most  callings, 
from  toadying  to  the  authorities  and  playing  the 
courtier  to  social,  religious  and  industrial  vested 
interests,  on  the  whole  the  teacher  can  best  ad- 
vance himself  by  rendering  good  service  in  his 
field  to  the  same  extent  as  the  worker  in  other 
fields.  The  teachers  can  hardly  be  expected  to  re- 
veal less  altruism,  any  more  than  they  can  be  ex- 
pected to  reveal  less  intelligence,  than  other 
workers. 

But  experience  would  indicate  that  the  applica- 
tion of  the  guild  socialist  principle  even  in  teach- 
ing would  be  attended  by  grave  perils.  Probably 
few  forces  have  been  so  hostile  to  thoroughgoing 
reforms  in  our  school-systems  as  have  the  teach- 
ers themselves.  Whenever  the  contemplated  re- 
forms involved  longer  hours  for  them — the  indict- 
ment levelled  against  the  proposal  to  introduce  the 
Gary  system  in  the  public  schools  of  New  York 
City,  for  instance — the  teachers  have  often  been 
found  to  prefer  their  own  comfort  to  the  welfare 
of  the  community.  In  those  municipalities  where 
politics  and  schools  have  become  bedfellows,  it  has 
frequently  been  the  teachers  themselves  who  have 
pulled  political  wires  in  the  hope  of  acquiring 
favors,  even  though  teachers  should  be  the  very 


82  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

first  to  recognize  that  the  intrusion  of  politics  into 
the  public  school  system  involves  an  irreparable 
injury  to  the  children  in  their  charge  and  to  the 
entire  community.  If  the  teachers  should  be  given 
complete  control  of  education,  it  is  therefore  hard 
to  hope  that  they  would  be  able  to  resist  the  per- 
fectly normal  impulse  to  alter  the  processes  of  the 
educational  system  with  an  eye  first  to  their  own 
advantage,  and  only  secondly  to  the  full  needs  of 
the  schools.  Again,  the  checks  upon  that  im- 
pulse provided  by  the  suggested  Cultural  Coun- 
cils, representing  the  entire  community's  interest 
in  education,  seem  inadequate. 

What  holds  good  for  teachers  when  organized 
into  a  completely  autonomous  group  will  surely 
hold  good  for  plumbers,  bricklayers,  miners, 
lumberjacks,  and  machinists.  If  the  teachers 
prove  themselves  weak  sisters  in  the  face  of  the 
temptation,  the  thoroughly  human  and  perhaps 
not  reprehensible  temptation,  to  think  first  and 
basically  of  their  own  interests,  surely  we  have  no 
authority  to  assert  that  face-to-face  with  the  same 
fire  the  plumbers,  bricklayers,  miners,  lumberjacks 
and  machinists^will  not  prove  themselves  weak 
brothers.  To  present  men  with  the  opportunity 
of  lowering  their  hours  of  labor  and  of  raising 
their  wages,  even  to  the  point  of  injuring  society, 
and  then  to  trust  them  to  refrain  lest  society  be 
injured,  seems  to  impose  upon  man's  moral  con- 
stitution a  burden  which  in  his  present  state  of 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  83 

moral  development  is  unwarranted  and  unjusti- 
fied. 

It  may  be  objected,  again,  that  these  pessimistic 
considerations  are'  proved  unreal  by  the  recorpLof 
the  workers'  present  association  into  industrial 
groups,  or  trade  unions.  The  national  guildsman 
may  claim  that  the  guild  is  but  the  logical  exten- 
sion of  the  union,  and  that  the  former  cannot  logi- 
cally be  rejected  because  of  the  danger  of  its 
selfish  aggrandisement  without  rejecting  also  the 
latter.  Certainly,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the 
trade  unions  have  been,  are,  and  give  every  prom- 
ise of  continuing  to  be,  a  thoroughly  helpful  ele- 
ment in  raising  the  level  of  existence,  not  only  of 
Labor,  but  of  the  whole  community.  But  between 
the  trade  union  in  a  capitalistic  or  even  4ft  a 
socialistic  system  of  society  and  the  national  guild 
under  guild  socialism  there  is  a  dissimilarity  which 
may  not  be  marked,  but  which  is  profound.  It  is  not 
merely  that  the  trade  union  of  today  exists  largely 
for  the  negative  purpose  of  preventing  the  exploit- 
ation of  its  members,  and  of  wringing  from  the  em- 
ployers concessions  which  have  become  manifestly 
overdue.  For  even  under  Socialism  the  trade 
union  fortunately  seems  destined  to  prevent  the 
exploitation  of  its  members  by  the  state,  and  to 
wring  from  the  state  any  concessions  which  may 
become  overdue.  The  difference  is  that,  even  so, 
the  trade  union  under  Socialism  will  not  be  wholly 
independent,  even  solely  in  the  field  of  production, 


84  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

of  the  political  state.  The  political  state,  volun- 
tarily or  involuntarily,  will  grant  autonomy  to 
the  union,  and  will  interfere  as  little  as  possible 
in  its  direct  workings;  but  in  the  last  analysis, 
and  not  merely  during  crises  in  the  nation's  de- 
velopment, the  trade  union  will  have  to  recognize 
the  ultimate  sovereignty  of  the  state  in  the  indus- 
trial as  well  as  in  the  political  field.  Where  the 
advantage  to  the  union  conflicts  with  advantage 
to  the  remainder  of  the  population,  the  former  will 
have  to  yield  precedence  to  the  latter.  Doubtless, 
in  most  phases  of  the  worker's  life,  his  point  of 
view  will  be  his  union  point  of  view;  but  in  the 
background  of  his  consciousness,  available  for 
summons  at  necessity,  will  thus  hover  the  social 
point  of  view  of  the  welfare  of  the  entire  com- 
munity. 

The  Plumb  Plan  for  our  railroads  gives  the 
railroad  workers  a  certain  amount  of  independ- 
ence in  their  calling,  and,  if  put  into  operation, 
would  probably  be  progressively  altered  so  as  to 
give  them  more.  But  it  nevertheless  is  based  on 
the  assumption  of,  and  keeps  constantly  before 
the.  railroad  employees'  vision,  the  paramount  con- 
ception of  the  union's  welfare  as  subordinate  to 
the  welfare  .of  the  public  at  large,  whenever  the 
two  happen  not  to  coincide.  Complete  autonomy 
and  the  right  to  strike  for  autonomy  up  to  the 
point  of  secession  from  the  sovereignty  of  the 
political  state  must  be  granted  labor  organizations 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  85 

under  Socialism;  but  that  will  still  fall  short  of 
the  guild  socialist  conception,  as  it  is  understood 
in  the  United  States.  There  is  as  much  difference 
between  industrial  autonomy  of  unions  and  their 
complete  independence  as  between  political  auton- 
omy of  British  colonies  and  their  complete  inde- 
pendence from  the  ultimate  sovereignty  of  the 
British  Empire.  It  is  obvious  that  the  grant  of 
complete  independence  to  the  component  parts  of 
the  British  Empire  would  involve  the  disintegra- 
tion of  the  Empire,  which  may  or  may  not  be  de- 
sirable. Similarly,  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  how 
the  grant  of  complete  independence  to  the  com- 
ponent units  of  industrial  production  within  the 
political  state  would  not  finally  involve -the  dis- 
integration of  that  state — which  may  or  may  not 
be  desirable,  but  which  falls  beyond  the  scope  of 
'  the  present  survey,  necessarily  based  *on  the 
postulation  of  the  undesirability  of  anarchism. 

But,  finally,  the  national  gaildsman  may  demur 
on  the  ground  that  the  guilds  under  guild  socialism 
would  not  be  independent  in  their  sovereignty. 
Each  would  be  subject  to  the  decrees  of  .the  general 
guild  congress,  which  would  represent  all  the 
guilds ;  and  it  would  be  the  guild  congress,  not  the 
individual  guild,  whose  jurisdiction  would  be  su- 
preme in  the  field  of  production.  Any  tendency 
that  a  single  guild  might  develop  toward  selfish 
aggrandisement  should  thus  be  checked  by  the  ac- 
tion of  the  other  guilds.  Now,  it  is  true  that  where 


86  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

the  self-interest  of  a  single  guild,  or  of  a  small 
group  of  guilds,  should  conflict  with  the  interests 
of  the  entire  body  of  guilds,  the  latter,  through  the 
general  guild  congress,  could  be  counted  upon  to 
interpose  a  veto.  But  the  decisions  of  the  gen- 
eral guild  congress  could  easily  be  dominated  by 
a  group  representing  the  majority  of  workers 
within  the  guilds  and  yet  not  representing  the  ma- 
jority of  the  population.  As  for  control  over  the 
guilds  by  the  entire  community,  through  joint 
councils  with  the  bodies  representing  the  con- 
sumers' and  civic  interests — if  I  understand  the 
proposal  correctly,  in  practise  it  hardly  guaran- 
tees that  the  control  will  be  effective,  and  in 
theory  it  should  not  represent  the  community's 
interests  more  adequately  than  a  central  politi- 
cal body  organized  occupationally.  And  that  in- 
volves the  all-important  question  of  method  of 
procedure. 

If  any  deduction  from  the  hectic  history  of 
Anglo-Saxon  countries  in  the  past  one  hundred 
years  can  be  hazarded  for  the  benefit  of  the  next 
one  hundred  years,  it  would  be  the  stolid  aver- 
sion of  Anglo-Saxon  electorates  to  entertain  new 
ideas  so  subversive  of  the  old  as  justly  to  be 
termed  revolutionary.  Except  when  hurled  into 
the  midst  of  actual  revolutionary  events,  such  as  a 
war  or  a  business  panic,  Anglo-Saxondom  sticks 
by  the  process  of  gradual  change  in  the  old  ideas. 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  87 

By  perseverance,  propagandists  can  manage  to 
bring  England  and  'the  United  States  around  to 
consider  the  extension  or  the  diminution  of  their 
current  forms  of  political  government;  but  it  is 
hardly  an  exaggeration  to  conclude  that  only  by  a 
miracle  or  a  cataclysm  can  they  bring  these  coun- 
tries around,  no  longer  to  alter  their  old  concep- 
tions gradually  in  the  direction  of  new  ones,  but 
rudely  and  cleanly  to  uproot  them,  and  in  the 
same  gesture  replace  them,  by  an  altogether  novel 
political  system.  It  is  not  now  open  to  England 
and  the  United  States  to  start  with  a  clean  slate, 
as  it  was  open  to  the  American  colonies  at  the  end 
of  the  eighteenth  century,  and  as  it  has  recently 
become  open  to  Eussia,  and  to  less  degree,  to  Ger- 
many, Poland,  and  the  new  states  evolved  from  the 
collapse  of  Austria-Hungary.  England  and  the 
United  States  have  now  a  political  past  whose 
intellectual  and  emotional  claims  upon  them  can- 
not be  denied  or  evaded.  It  may  take  a  new  broom 
to  sweep,  clean,  but  Anglo-Saxondom  now  seems 
in  normal  times  to  shudder  at  clean  sweeps. 
Now,  in  comparison  with  our  current  political 
system,  guild  socialism  is  an  altogether  revolu- 
tionary idea.  It  lays  violent  hands  upon  the 
theory  of  the  unified  sovereignty  of  the  political 
state  which  has  now  become  cherished  so  very 
fervently  in  Anglo-Saxon  bosoms  as  to  develop 
into  a  pseudo-religious  article  of  faith.  And  the 
great  bulk  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  electorate  will  not 


88  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

only  be  unwilling  to  grasp  the  implications  of  any 
new  principle  which  runs  counter  to  the  unified 
sovereignty  of  the  political  state — it  also  may  be 
unable  to  grasp  them.  Socialist  propaganda  has 
been  conducted  with  rare  persistence,  although 
also  with  rare  clumsiness,  for  several  decades  in 
the  United  States;  and  still  it  may  be  seriously 
doubted  if  it  has  penetrated  the  minds  of  the  mass 
of  Americans  sufficiently  to  explain  the  Socialist 
idea  to  them.  It  may  seriously  be  doubted  if  it  is 
only  a  minority  of  the  one  hundred  five  million 
Americans  who  still  believe  that  socialism  is  a 
step  in  the  direction  of  anarchism  rather  than  a 
step  away  from  anarchism,  or  if  indeed  it  is  only 
a  minority  who  still  believe  that  socialism  and 
anarchism  are  largely  synonymous. 

But  as  contrasted  with  the  socialist  conception 
of  the  state,  the  guild  socialist  conception  is  more 
difficult  of  comprehension  and  apprehension.  How 
much  more  onerous  and  tedious,  then,  to  make  the 
guild  socialist  idea  understood !  How  much  more 
open  than  even  the  socialist  idea  it  will  be  to  mis- 
representation, honest  or  dishonest,  from  the 
sources  from  which  most  public  opinion  is  formu- 
lated! True,  if  most  Americans  were  industrial 
workers,  they  might  not  find  the  guild  socialist 
program  so  hard  to  comprehend;  but  the  majority 
of  Americans  is  not  composed  of  industrial  work- 
ers. Before  the  guild  socialist  idea  could  become 
dominant  in  the  United  States,  it  would  have 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  89 

to  be  fairly  appreciated  by  the  large  agricultural 
class  and  the  middle  economic  class  who  still,  in 
many  cases,  seem  unable  to  appreciate  the  present 
status  of  mere  trade  union  aspirations  in  the  mod- 
ern capitalist  political  state.  Of  course,  if  no 
other  road  seems  to  be  open,  the  rejectors  of  the 
capitalist  system  will  have  to  buckle  down  to 
the  frightfully  difficult  task  of  converting  this 
non-working-class  majority  to  the  guild  socialist 
conception.  But  if  it  be  possible  to  arrive  at,  or 
approximately  at,  the  guild  socialist  goal  by  the 
gradual  transformation  of  capitalism  into  social- 
ism, for  which,  after  all,  the  ground  has  now  been 
partially  broken,  and  thence  into  whatever  of  guild 
socialism  seems  demanded  by  mankind 's  needs,  the 
procedure  will  be  rendered  less  difficult,  more 
rapid  and  probably  freer  from  pitfalls. 

For  Socialism,  in  the  theory  underlying  its  pro- 
gram, cannot  be  regarded  as  an  altogether  revo- 
lutionary alteration  of  the  present  political  state. 
It  is  only  the  theory  underlying  its  philosophy  as 
commonly  promulgated  which  demands  a  revolu- 
tionary change  in  the  mental  concepts  now  current 
in  Anglo-Saxondom.  Indeed,  it  is  the  Socialists' 
insistence,  especially  in  the  United  States,  on 
clothing  their  appeal  and  their  program  in  the 
shell  of  the  class  struggle,  and  the  economic  in- 
terpretation of  history,  and  the  social  revolution 
(sic),  and  the  theory  of  surplus  value,  which  has 
persuaded  the  great  bulk  of  the  electorate  that 


90  THE  LAKGER  SOCIALISM 

Socialism  involves  a  complete  upheaval  of  our  po- 
litical system.  American  Socialists  may  resent 
the  common  American  belief  that  Socialism  is  in- 
compatible with  Americanism,  but  for  that  belief 
they  have  chiefly  themselves  to  blame.  They  have 
succumbed  to  the  emotional  temptation  to  depict 
themselves  as  revolutionists,  devoted  to  a  revolu- 
tionary program;  and  the  man  in  the  street  may 
well  be  pardoned  for  being  so  unversed  in  the  nice- 
ties of  radical  phraseology  as  to  jump  at  the 
conclusion  that  a  revolution  in  America  implied 
an  assault  on  the  institutions  existing  in  America. 
Only  a  small  amount  of  anti-Socialist  propaganda 
was  thus  necessary  to  induce  the  populace  to  take 
the  Socialists  at  their  word.  But  many  of  the  all- 
important  activities  of  even  the  present  capitalis- 
tic political  state  in  America  are  prosecuted  in  ac- 
cord with  the  theory  of  Socialism.  And  it  is  as 
difficult  to  see  what  Socialism  stood  to  lose  as  it 
is  easy  to  see  what  Socialism  stood  to  gain  if  the 
American  Socialists  had  explained  to  the  Ameri- 
can public  that  Socialism  was  more  of  an  exten- 
sion than  an  innovation. 

Socialism  in  the  United  States  would  be  im- 
measurably nearer  realization  if  its  adherents  had 
taken  the  tack  of  paraphrasing  Bernard  Shaw, 
reminding  their  hearers  that  the  anti-Socialist 
leaving  his  club  near  midnight  steps  to  a  social- 
istic sidewalk  along  a  socialistic  street  bordered 
with  socialistic  trees ;  lights  his  cigar  with  a  match 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  91 

struck  on  a  socialistic  street-lamp,  often  deriv- 
ing power  from  a  socialistic  gas  or  electricity 
plant,  and  lit  five  hours  previously  by  a  socialistic 
lamplighter  employed  by  the  city's  socialistic 
department  of  street  illumination;  crosses  a 
socialistic  bridge  over  a  socialistic  river,  often  tra- 
versed by  socialistic  ferryboats ;  passes  a  social- 
istic school  which  will  be  manned  the  follow- 
ing morning  by  socialistic  teachers;  drops  a  let- 
ter into  a  socialistic  mail-box  which  is  a  part  of  the 
socialistic  postal  system;  as  he  passes  through  a 
socialistic  park,  cheerily  greets  a  socialistic  police- 
man ;  stops  to  watch  a  socialistic  fire  engine  of  the 
socialistic  fire  department  proceeding  to  extin- 
guish an  unsocialistic  fire ;  and,  on  arriving  home, 
awakens  his  wife  to  repeat  to  her  some  of  the 
arguments  he  had  used  in  the  discussion  at  the 
club  to  prove  that  Socialism  was  all  right  in 
theory,  but  could  never  be  applied  in  practise. 
And  such  tactics  would  not  only  have  brought 
Socialism  nearer.  There  is  no  evidence,  aside 
from  mutterings  anent  " bourgeois  reform"  and 
"compromise,"  that  the  Socialism  thus  sooner 
achieved  would  be  less  full  or  less  rich  than  the 
Socialism  to  be  later  achieved  by  more  intransi- 
geant  tactics. 

But  whether  the  socialist  creed  be  paraded  be- 
fore the  public  in  evolutionary  or  in  revolutionary 
raiment,  surely  its  essence  can  be  more  readily  and 
will  be  more  willingly  grasped  by  the  electorate 


92  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

than  the  guild  socialist  creed.  If,  accordingly, 
the^guildsman  can  attain  his  desideratum  through 
the  success  of  Socialism,  followed  by  Socialism's 
liberalization  toward  the  guild  idea,  he  will  there- 
by probably  attain  it  sooner  than  by  rejecting  the 
socialist  movement  altogether,  and  bombarding 
the  public  with  unadulterated  guild  socialist  shot. 
The  national  guildsman  may  retort  that  the  politi- 
cal state  as  owner  and  manager  in  industry  is  so 
evil,  and  so  diametrically  a  step  away  from,  rather 
than  toward,  the  guild  socialist  state,  that  he  can- 
not compromise  with  Socialism  any  more  readily 
than  he  can  compromise  with  capitalism.  But  the 
Socialist  state  can  go — indeed,  must  go — great 
lengths  toward  the  realization  of  the  guild  social- 
ist program,  even  if  it  cannot  go  the  entire  dis- 
tance. For,  even  if  the  confirmed  Socialist  insists 
that  the  national  guildsman 's  picture  of  industry 
under  Socialism  is  overdrawn,  yet  surely  there  can 
be  no  denial  that  the  guild  socialist  colors  have 
startlingly  revealed  many  rough  spots  on  the 
Socialist  canvas.  Most  Socialists  today  would  ad- 
mit that  their  hammering  at  the  hands  of  the 
national  guildsmen  has  forced  them  to  alter  the 
Socialist  program  in  many  particulars;  and  that 
all  too  well-founded  are  the  guild  socialist  indict- 
ment and  rejection  of  industry  proceeding  under 
the  direct  and  bureaucratic  management  of  the 
central  political  state,  with  little  more  power  and 


SOCIALISM  AND  GUILD  SOCIALISM  93 

responsibility  reposed  in  the  workers  than  now  ob- 
taining. 

As  a  result  of  guild  socialist  and  syndicalist 
agitation,  the  Socialist  program  has  shifted  far 
toward  workers '  autonomy  in  industry,  with  as  lit- 
tle interference  as  possible  from  the  political  state 
except  in  general  legislation.  Thanks  largely  to 
guild  socialism,  any  Socialist  administration  ar- 
riving at  power  must  be  prepared  almost  imme- 
diately to  grant  the  workers'  organizations  in  the 
various  industries  an  almost  free  hand  in  the  de- 
velopment of  their  industries.  With  the  grant  of 
this  large  measure  of  autonomy,  there  would  be 
fair  opportunity  to  determine  the  sufficiency  of 
the  Socialist  program  in  meeting  the  workers' 
legitimate  demands  for  freedom  from  undue  and 
socially-harmful  outside  interference  and  from 
possible  state  exploitation.  If  then  the  Socialist 
program  should  be  found  insufficient  to  meet  these 
demands,  and  the  correctness  of  the  guild  social- 
ist principle  should  be  sustained,  the  final  step 
from  socialism  to  guild  socialism  should  be  taken 
with  less  of  a  wrench  than  would  be  involved 
in  the  step  from  capitalism  directly  to  guild 
socialism. 

If  these  considerations  are  substantially  valid, 
it  would  seem  that  the  duty  devolves  upon  the 
guildsmen  of  refraining  from  weakening  the  So- 
cialist movement  while  keeping  alive  their  guild 
socialist  ideal  and  program,  trusting  that  the  ulti- 


94  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

mate  administration  of  a  Socialist  state  not  only 
will  be  a  long  step  and  the  quickest  possible  step 
toward  guild  socialism,  but  also  will  afford  the 
best  possible  opportunity  for  the  necessary  test  of 
the  practicability  of  the  guild  program.  Insistence 
on  the  guild  socialist  idea  alone  would  seem  like 
abandoning  progress  already  made  toward  the 
center  of  the  state  from  the  entrance  to  the  right, 
after  much  and  long  painful  groping  and  stum- 
bling, only  to  reach,  after  additional  long  and  pain- 
ful groping  and  stumbling,  the  same  center  of  the 
same  stage  from  the  entrance  to  the  left. 


CHAPTEE  IV. 

SOCIALISM     AND     THE     MARXIAN     CAST     OF     THOUGHT. 

BUT  the  problem  of  Socialist  procedure  has 
deeper  implications.  The  entire  Socialist  move- 
ment in  the  United  States  lies  in  utmost  need  of 
reconsidering,  not  merely  the  relation  between  it 
and  the  guild  socialist  movement,  but  the  relation 
between  it  and  the  whole  spectrum  of  American 
life.  For  obviously  something  is  wrong.  After 
some  twenty  years  of  a  centrally-organized  Social- 
ist movement,  following  almost  as  many  preceding, 
years  of  more  or  less  spasmodic  Socialist  propa- 
ganda, the  Socialist  Party  of  America  has  not  yet 
polled  seven  per  cent  of  the  votes  in  a  presidential 
election.  Only  on  five  occasions  have  Socialists 
been  elected  to  the  national  House  of  Representa- 
tives, never  more  than  one  at  a  time,  with  only 
two  Congressional  districts  thus  represented  and 
each  of  them  composed  largely  of  a  foreign-born 
electorate;  and  no  single  Socialist  candidate  has 
yet  come  close  to  election  to  the  Senate.  The  two 
large  cities  which  have  elected  Socialist  mayors 
are  in  neighboring  states;  and  outside  of  them 
and  New  York,  Chicago,  Cleveland,  Buffalo,  there 

95 


96  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

have  been  no  Socialist  municipal  aldermen  or 
councilmen  in  our  largest  cities.  In  Philadelphia, 
with  almost  2,000,000  people,  in  Detroit,  St. 
Louis,  Boston,  Baltimore,  all  cities  with  a  popula- 
tion of  more  than  700,000,  and  all  important  in- 
dustrial and  manufacturing  centres,  not  one 
Socialist  has  been  elected  to  important  office  on 
the  Socialist  ticket.  It  will  not  be  expected  that 
membership  in  the  Socialist  Party  of  America 
should  approximate  the  Socialist  vote,  any  more 
than  that  the  number  of  members  in  Democratic 
or  Republican  organizations  should  approximate 
the  Democratic  or  Republican  vote;  but  there  is 
room  for  serious  thought  in  the  fact  that  mem- 
bership in  the  Socialist  Party  has  never  risen  far 
above  the  100,000  level,  and  that  at  present  there 
are  probably  less  than  50,000  holders  of  S.  P. 
cards.  It  may  be  seriously  doubted  if  the  Com- 
munist Party  and  Communist  Labor  Party  would 
have  been  able  to  roll  up  a  larger  combined  mem- 
bership than  50,000  if  they  had  not  been  subjected 
to  ruthlessly  unprincipled  official  and  unofficial 
persecution.  And  the  vote,  not  the  membership,  of 
the  Socialist  Labor  Party  in  the  national  election 
of  1916  was  14,180,  in  a  total  vote  of  more  than 
18,500,000. 

Moreover,  the  membership  of  the  Socialist  Party 
of  America  has  been  recruited  to  an  abnormally 
large  extent  from  the  foreign-born.  Indeed,  many 
of  these  foreign-born  members  had  been  partici- 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  97 

pants  in  the  Socialist  movements  of  their  respec- 
tive countries  of  birth,  and  for  their  presence  in 
the  Socialist  ranks  in  the  United  States  the  Social- 
ist movement  of  America  is  but  slightly  responsi- 
ble. The  national  Socialist  vote,  such  as  it  is — 
about  6%  in  1912,  about  3y±%  in  19i6  and  less  than 
4%  of  the  total  in  1920 — was  polled  largely  in  the 
foreign-born  sections  of  the  country.  (However, 
in  all  fairness  it  shoujd  be  added  that  the  1916 
elections  were  fought  primarily  on  the  issue  of 
participation  in  the  World  War,  when  to  cast  a 
vote  which  could  have  no  effect  in  re-electing  or 
defeating  President  Wilson  was  asking  too  much 
of  the  practical-minded  American  electorate.) 
The  two  large  cities  which  have  elected  Socialist 
mayors  have  been  Milwaukee  and  Minneapolis. 
In  1910,  30%  of  the  population  of  Milwaukee  was 
foreign-born,  and  of  almost  50%  of  the  popula- 
tion one  or  both  parents  were  foreign-born.  The 
corresponding  figures  for  Minneapolis  were  28y2% 
and  39%.  These  figures  must  be  viewed  in  the 
light  of  a  141/2%  foreign-born  population  and  a 
2Ql/2%  of  foreign  or  mixed  parentage  for  the  en- 
tire country  in  1910.  Of  the  delegates  to  the 
national  Socialist  convention  in  1920,  some  40% 
were  foreign-born;  since  a  native-born  member 
would  naturally  have  at  least  no  disadvantage 
over  a  foreign-born  member  in  the  selection  of  the 
delegates  by  the  Socialist  locals,  it  may  not  be 
unwarranted  to  deduce  that  at  least  that  proper- 


98  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

tion  of  the  Socialist  Party  membership  is  foreign- 
born.  These  statistics  are  eloquent.  They  cry 
aloud  that  the  Socialist  movement  in  the  United 
States  has  failed,  signally  failed,  to  impress  itself 
as  firmly  upon  the  American  consciousness  as  the 
Socialist  movement  has  impressed  itself  upon  the 
consciousness  of  all  the  other  great  Western 
Powers. 

The  American  Socialist  can  hardly  maintain 
that  the  backwardness  of  the  American  Socialist 
movement,  so  far  as  popular  support  for  it  is  con- 
cerned, is  due  to  the  large  number  of  farmers  in 
the  United  States.  For  there  is  Italy,  although  it 
is  true  that  there  may  be  in  Italy  proportionate- 
ly less  farmer  ownership  of  the  land  than  in  the 
United  States.  Moreover,  the  number  of  farmers 
in  the  United  States  has  been  proportionately  de- 
creasing, but  the  Socialist  vote  has  not  been  pro- 
portionately increasing.  Nor  can  he  well  maintain 
that  the  Socialist  achievement  in  this  country  is 
satisfactory  in  view  of  its  youth.  The  achievement 
of  national  prohibition  shows  what  can  be  accom- 
plished within  several  decades  by  a  movement 
which  is  well  organized  and  which  appeals  warmly 
to  the  bulk  of  the  population;  and  after  twenty 
years  of  organization  most  of  the  European  Social- 
ist parties  could  boast  of  achievements  far  more 
considerable  than  those  which  the  Socialist  Party 
of  America  can  produce.  Even  if  the  votes  cast 
for  the  national  Farmer-Labor  ticket  in  1920  be 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  99 

counted  as  Socialist  votes  and  added  to  the  votes 
cast  for  Debs,  from  the  information  available  as 
I  write  it  appears  that  such  a  total  Socialist  vote 
would  not  exceed  5%  of  all  the  votes  cast.  Of  such 
a  percentage  of  the  total  popular  vote  in  their 
respective  countries,  most  European  Socialist 
parties  would  be  heartily  ashamed.  And  even 
these  few  Socialist  ballots  were  ballots  largely  of 
mere  protest  against  Palmerism  and  Burlesonism, 
and  against  the  failure  of  either  the  Republican  or 
the  Democratic  Party  to  nominate  a  progressive 
or  a  liberal  or  even  a  well-known  candidate — many 
of  the  Socialist  voters  in  1920  were  not  voting  for 
Socialism  and  will  probably  desert  the  Socialist 
ticket  in  1922  and  1924.  Even  allowing  for  the 
facts  of  the  temporary  unpopularity  of  the  Social- 
ist Party  because  of  its  anti-war  attitude,  the  de- 
fection of  the  Communist  elements,  the  enforced 
collapse  of  the  Socialist  organization  in  many 
states,  and  the  nomination  for  President  of  a  man 
serving  a  jail  sentence  for  opposing  the  selective 
draft,  even  with  these  allowances  it  is  startling  to 
realize  that  in  1920  the  Socialist  Party  did  not  poll 
as  high  a  percentage  of  the  total  ballots  cast  as  in 
1912.  And  in  1912  there  were  three  instead  of  two 
major  political  parties  in  the  field,  with  only  one 
of  the  Presidential  candidates  an  avowed  con- 
servative and  with  another  of  unusually  strong 
personal  following,  particularly  in  the  ranks  of 
Labor. 


100  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

The  American  Socialist  may  maintain  that  the 
Socialist  movement  is  feeble  in  the  United  States 
because  the  American  working-class  has  not  yet 
become  a  proletariat  in  the  Marxian  sense  of  the 
word.  He  may  insist  that  the  natural  resources  of 
the  United  States  are  so  fertile  that  some  of  the 
prosperity  of  the  country  could  not  be  kept  from 
trickling  down  into  the  working-class,  so  that  the 
workers,  although  exploited,  are  yet  not  so  miser- 
able and  poor  as  the  workers  in  the  European 
countries  where  Socialism  has  become  powerful. 
But  such  reasoning  quite  begs  the  question.  If 
Socialism  cannot  arrive  in  the  United  States  until 
the  proletarians  represent  the  majority  of  the  pop- 
ulation, until  the  lot  of  the  proletariat  becomes 
wretched,  and  until  the  proletarians  become  des- 
perate ;  and  if  that  period  of  the  industrial  devel- 
opment of  the  United  States  is  not  yet  at  hand, 
then,  surely,  there  is  no  reason  for  the  existence  of 
a  politically-organized  Socialist  movement.  Until 
the  time  is  ripe  for  Socialism  in  America,  the  con- 
vinced Socialist  may  well  despair  of  converting  the 
American  people  to  the  Socialist  program ;  Social- 
ist propaganda  and  education  of  the  working-class 
will  be  valuable,  but  the  organization  of  a  politi- 
cal Socialist  movement  should  wait  until  the  soil 
becomes  ready  to  receive  the  Socialist  seed.  For 
the  true  cause  of  the  backwardness  of  the  Ameri- 
can Socialist  movement  one  must  obviously  look 
elsewhere. 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  101 

The  chief  weakness  of  the  Socialist  movement  in 
presenting  its  case  to  the  people  of  the  United 
States  has  been  a  mental  weakness.  The  Ameri- 
can Socialist  mind,  as  a  rule,  does  not  survey  with 
unbiased  eye  the  rottenness  of  the  present  social 
system,  and  inductively  frame  a  program  to  rem- 
edy it.  Bather,  our  Socialist  mind  generally  ab- 
sorbs the  analyses  of  Karl  Marx,  and  deductively 
applies  the  answer  of  half  a  century  past  to  the 
facts  of  today.  Even  where  the  Socialist  move- 
ment in  the  United  States  has  broken  away  from 
Marxism,  it  is  not  a  break  with  the  Marxian  men- 
tal processes.  Most  American  Socialists  reach 
the  Socialist  answer  by  dint  of  first  pondering 
Marx,  next  applying  him  to  the  modern  social 
system,  and  then  retaining  as  much  of  him  as  pos- 
sible. The  result  via  Marx  may  finally  be  identi- 
cal with  the  result  via  independent  thought,  but 
it  arrives  garbed  in  cumbersome  and  misleading 
trappings.  Thus,  when  boiled  down  to  workable 
phraseology,  the  orthodox  Socialist  or  Marxian 
program  may  be  summarized  as  Government  Own- 
ership and  Management ;  but  the  orthodox  Social- 
ist or  the  Marxian  usually  rebels  when  his  pro- 
gram is  thus  paraphrased.  He  has  reached  his 
conclusions  by  way  of  the  economic  interpretation 
of  history,  the  class  struggle  and  surplus  value; 
and  if  he  finally  emerges  from  them  into  mere 
Government  Ownership  and  Management,  he  feels 
vaguely  that  he  might  have  reached  that  answer 

LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 


102  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

without  laborious  resort  to  the  Marxian  philo- 
sophic trinity. 

Even  if  the  Marxian  explanation  of  society 
could  be  accepted  today  by  all  students  of  society, 
accepted  without  qualification  or  amendment,  no 
political  movement  could  base  its  program  on 
Marx  and  on  Marx  alone,  and  hope  for  success 
which  should  be  more  than  transient.  Unless  the 
Marxian  pronouncements  be  dowered  with  the 
infallibility  which  we  generally  ascribe  only  to 
Divinity,  sooner  or  later  some  aspect  of  society's 
development  would  deviate,  slightly  or  seriously, 
from  the  line  of  procedure  predicted  by  the  Father 
of  Socialism.  Then  the  Marxian  movement  would 
willy-nilly  become  nonplussed.  Years  of  habitua- 
tion  to  applying  accepted  doctrines  to  reality 
would  render  the  movement  intellectually  in- 
capable of  framing  a  new  doctrine  and  a  new  ma- 
chinery adequate  to  meet  the  challenge  of  the  new 
rebellious  reality.  The  deductive  mind  inevitably 
becomes  dogmatic,  and  it  is  pathetically  helpless 
when  faced  by  a  novel  and  unprecedented  situa- 
tion. Indeed,  almost  every  page  of  Marx  gives 
forth  evidence  of  such  rudely  overbearing  intoler- 
ance of,  and  such  extreme  intellectual  brutality 
toward,  those  with  whom  he  differed  as  to  give 
rise  to  a  sharp  suspicion  that  a  movement  based 
only  on  those  pages  can  never  develop  the  under- 
standing and  appreciation  of  its  opponents' 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  103 

motives  without  which  stable  success  must  be  im- 
possible. 

What  Marx  did  was  to  gather  all  the  significant 
facts  on  which  he  could  lay  his  grasping  and  sensi- 
tive fingers,  and  erect  them  into  a  structure  whose 
magnificence  and  completeness  must  make  the  be- 
holder gasp  with  admiration.  But  mankind 's  stub- 
born quest  for  truth  has  vitiated  some  of  the  facts 
upon  which  all  its  greatest  teachers  of  the  past 
have  relied  for  their  reasoning,  and  hence  has  vi- 
tiated much  of  that  reasoning  itself.  And  Marx 
would  have  been  among  the  first  to  recognize  that 
eventually  some  of  the  facts  on  which  he  had  re- 
lied would  be  exposed  as  not  facts  at  all,  but  as 
misconceptions ;  and  that  then  his  reasoning  based 
on  those  facts  would  have  to  be  thoroughly  over- 
hauled. The  Marxian  system  is  all  the  more 
vulnerable  to  the  iconoclasm  of  Time  because  its 
constituent  elements  dovetail  so  closely  that  if  one 
of  them  should  be  destroyed,  the  remainder  would 
be  as  the  proverbial  chain  with  the  one  broken 
link.  If  Marx  were  alive  today,  he  would  be  among 
those  most  eager  to  digest  and  utilize  the  new 
knowledge  of  human  history  and  of  social  organi- 
zation which  has  inevitably  arisen  since  the  publi- 
cation of  Capital,  and  much  of  which  inevitably 
contradicts  the  conceptions  from  which  the  con- 
clusions expressed  in  Capital  were  drawn.  Cer- 
tainly, he  would  have  concentrated,  not  only  on  the 
struggle  between  economic  classes,  but  also  on  the 


104  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

struggle  of  men  of  all  classes  against  their  biologi- 
cally inherited  tendencies.  For  example,  in  a  sane 
and  exact  evaluation  of  the  discoveries  of  Freud, 
there  would  be  no  keener  student  than  Karl  Marx. 
If  he  were  alive  today,  he  would  probably  repeat 
with  fervor  what  he  is  reported  to  have  repeated 
during  his  lifetime :  '  *  Thank  God,  I  am  no  Marx- 
ist." 

Few  leaders  have  suffered  so  grievously  from 
the  zoal  of  their  disciples  as  has  Marx.  If  his 
disciples  had  been  content  to  cherish  their  master 
as  the  modern  biologists  cherish  Darwin — at  the 
same  time  zealously  preserving  their  intellectual 
independence — Marx  might  well  have  been  re- 
garded by  future  ages  as  the  most  beneficent  of 
all  single  personal  forces  in  the  world  since  Jesus, 
instead  of  merely  as  one  of  the  most,  if  not  the 
most,  stimulating.  It  was  Marx's  great  achieve- 
ment that  he  should  have  been  practically  the  first 
thinker  seriously  to  shatter  the  concepts  on  which 
the  capitalist  philosophy  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury was  founded.  The  soil  he  ploughed  was  well- 
nigh  forest  primeval ;  he  had  to  clear  it  of  its  clut- 
tering debris  before  he  could  sow  his  crop.  And 
if  crops  of  later  sowers  have  seemed  more  abun- 
dant and  more  palatable,  their  abundance  and 
tastiness  have  been  made  possible  only  by  Marx's 
clearance  and  preparation  of  the  ground.  The 
notability  and  preciousness  of  that  service  there 
will  be  few  to  deny. 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  105 

But  it  is  inconceivable  that  a  Socialist  move- 
ment would  not  have  arisen^  without  Marx.  It 
would  have  arisen  inductively,  rather  than  deduc- 
tively; from  the  exigencies  of  day-by-day  exist- 
ence; and  couched  in  terms  and  measures  which 
would  have  made  it  more  comprehensible  and 
doubtless  more  palatable  to  the  world  at  large. 
And  there  Marx's  disciples  wrought  their  evil. 
They  insisted  on  a  complete  abdication  in  favor  of 
his  analyses  and  program.  By  dint  of  the  aston- 
ishing earliness  and  comprehensiveness  of  their 
master's  work,  they  were  able  to  pre-empt  the 
field.  Those  struggling  toward  the  light  of  the 
socialist  answer  by  dint  of  rude  contact  with  the 
viciousness  of  capitalism,  rather  than  by  dint 
of  abstract  reasoning,  found  themselves  antici- 
pated. They  were  beaten  into  adherence  by  the 
strength  of  the  organization  of  the  Marxians,  and 
were  perforce  compelled  either  to  join  it  or  to 
render  themselves  impotent.  By  the  third  decade 
of  the  twentieth  century,  a  Socialist  movement" 
would  surely  have  been  on  foot,  Marx  or  no  Marx; 
and  it  may  well  be  pondered  if  its  tangible  achieve- 
ments, and  more  particularly  its  hope  of  rapid 
growth  and  victory  in  the  following  decades,  might 
not  have  been  greater  without  Marx,  just  as  it 
may  well  be  pondered  if  there  would  not  be  more 
actual  practice  of  the  Christian  teachings  today 
had  not  the  Church  surrounded  and  absorbed  them 
in  its  orthodox  and  rigid  theology. 


106  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

For,  since  Marx,  students  of  society  have 
learned  that  man  individually  and  collectively 
must  be  studied  psychologically  as  well  as  eco- 
nomically. Marx  may  not  have  relied  'so  largely 
(as  many  of  his  critics  are  wont  to  assert)  on  the 
conception  of  the  economic  man,  dominated  by  his 
economic  self-interest.  But  he  did  rely  upon  the 
dominance  of  economic  self-interest  in  organized 
society  to  an  extent  that  is  now  seen  to  have  been 
largely  unwarranted.  Even  though  economic  self- 
interest  may  start  the  impulse  which  finally  causes 
social  groups  such  as  nations  to  take  action,  yet 
the  impulse  often  is  psychologically  redirected  so 
as  to  escape  in  an  action  which  is  the  direct  an- 
tithesis of  self-interest. 

Consider,  for  example,  the  Socialist  explanation 
of  the  motives  of  those  Americans  who  were  most 
anxious  for  the  United  States  to  declare  war  on 
Germany  after  the  sinking  of  the  Lusitania.  For 
the  strength  or  the  weakness  of  the  American 
Socialist  movement  can  best  be  appreciated  by 
examination  of  its  reaction  to  the  World  "War,  the 
most  stupendous  single  fact  in  modern  history. 
If  the  Socialist  movement  of  the  United  States 
could  handle  in  an  adequate  fashion  the  situation 
produced  by  the  possibility  of  America's  entrance 
into  the  War,  it  could  handle  adequately  most  of 
the  problems  confronting  it  if  it  should  suddenly 
be  called  upon  to  administer  the  Government. 
Conversely,  if  it  should  respond  to  that  situation 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  107 

by  hopelessly  inadequate  and  unreal  explanations, 
it  obviously  lies  under  mental  influences  which  are 
unreliable.  Now,  the  stock  and  almost  unanimous 
Socialist  explanation  of  those  who  wished  Amer- 
ica to  declare  war  in,  say,  1916,  was  that  of  self- 
interest.  Such  persons  were  chiefly  of  the  upper 
economic  classes.  They  possessed  large  Allied  in- 
vestments; or  were  shareholders  in  munitions 
plants;  or  were  fearsome  that  a  German  victory 
would  compel  the  United  States  to  make  financial 
reparation  for  having  sold  munitions  to  the  Allies, 
involving  high  taxation  which  would  fall  most 
heavily  upon  the  American  propertied  and  wealthy 
classes ;  or  the  industries  in  which  they  were  finan- 
cially interested  were  becoming  by  1914  unable  to 
meet  the  competition  of  the  efficient  German  busi- 
ness methods,  and  would  be  enormously  benefited 
by  the  collapse  of  Germany,  and  by  the  consequent 
weakening  of  German  business  and  its  hold  upon 
the  world  markets  coveted  by  American  business ; 
or  they  coveted  German  colonial  territory  which 
would  supply  their  businesses  with  cheap  raw  ma- 
terials; or  they  wanted  an  army  and  navy  on  a 
huge  scale  in  order  later  to  defend  Capitalism 
against  the  onslaught  of  the  workers. 

And  yet,  if  the  Socialists  had  been  more  zealous 
to  establish  the  truth  than  to  justify  a  formula, 
they  would  have  realized  that  the  upper  economic 
classes  stood  to  gain  less  if  the  United  States  en- 
tered the  war  than  if  she  preserved  her  neutrality. 


108  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

True,  there  is  little  evidence  that  most  so-called 
hard-headed  business  men  are  guided  by  their 
reason  rather  than  by  their  emotions  to  a  greater 
extent  than,  or  even  to  the  same  extent  as,  the 
remainder  of  the  population.  But  there  is  a  small 
group  of  men  at  the  hub  of  American  business  who 
can  and  normally  do  survey  current  issues  with 
clear-headed  understanding  of  their  own  interests, 
and  from  this  small  group  largely  emanate  the 
opinions  which  usually  become  the  opinions  of 
most  of  the  business  world.  It  must  therefore 
have  been  evident  to  big  business  that  the  en- 
trance of  the  United  States  into  the  War  would 
see  the  imposition  of  drastic  income,  excess  profits 
and  war  profits  taxation  comparable  to  .the  taxa- 
tion of  the  other  belligerent  Powers.  Big  business 
must  have  realized  that  the  margin  of  profit  on 
the  munitions  and  other  supplies  it  would  sell 
to  a  belligerent  United  States  would  become  less 
than  the  margin  it  was  exacting  from  the 
Allied  belligerents.  The  few  clear-sighted  busi- 
ness men  could  understand,  and  could  make  their 
followers  understand,  that  the  longer  the  war  con- 
tinued, the  stronger  would  the  Labor  and  Socialist 
movements  become,  the  nearer  would  approach 
that  day  when  a  Labor  or  Socialist  Government 
would  overthrow  the  grasp  of  the  privileged  few 
on  industry,  and  in  the  meantime  the  more  con- 
siderable would  be  the  concessions  which  the 
Labor  and  Socialist  movements  could  exact  from 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  109 

Capital.  Even  before  April  6,  1917,  many  young 
men  of  the  American  upper  classes  had  enlisted  in 
the  Allied  armies.  Doubtless  many  of  them  so  en- 
listed from  love  of  adventure,  for  escape  from 
a  humdrum  commercial  life  or  from  other  equally 
mixed  and  intangible  motives ;  but  certainly  their 
own  economic  self-interest  would  have  retained 
most  of  them  in  American  business  pursuits,  safe 
from  the  danger  of  sudden  death  or  mutilation. 
Now,  in  one  sense  the  Socialists  were  undoubt- 
edly correct  in  asserting  that  the  earliest  clamor- 
ers  for  American  participation  in  the  War  were 
largely  of  the  propertied  classes.  It  was  true  that 
Capital  was  more  prone  than  Labor,  and  probably 
more  prone  than  Agriculture,  to  consider  the 
sinking  of  the  Lusitania  a  casus  belli.  For  in  the 
loss  of  the  Lusitania,  property  as  well  as  human 
lives  were  destroyed,  and  in  addition  the  honor  of 
the  United  States  was  definitely  affronted.  True, 
the  horror  at  the  loss  of  life  on  the  Lusitania  well 
outweighed  the  anger  at  the  loss  of  property  and 
at  the  insult,  and  probably  was  felt  as  strongly 
by  one  economic  class  as  by  another.  And  yet 
in  addition  the  man  of  property  could  experience, 
vaguely  and  inarticulately,  danger  in  and  ire  at 
the  destruction  of  American  property  prior  to,  if 
not  more  deeply  than,  the  propertyless  American. 
Even  the  land-owning  farmer  could  feel  that  his 
property  was  but  slightly  akin  to  the  kind  of 
property  represented  by  the  Lusitania  and  its 


110  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

cargo,  and  could  not  resent  the  German  violation 
of  property  rights  so  quickly  and  so  strongly  as 
the  owner  of  stocks  and  bonds. 

Again,  in  the  domain  of  patriotic  resentment  at 
national  insult,  it  would  manifestly  be  inaccurate 
and  unfair  to  assert  that  Labor  and  Agriculture 
finally  rallied  around  the  flag  less  earnestly  than 
Capital.  Nevertheless,  it  is  probably  both  accur- 
ate and  fair  to  suggest  that  the  upper  economic 
classes  are  generally  the  first  to  resent  a  national 
affront,  just  because  they  are  more  powerful  in 
the  country  and  own  more  of  its  wealth  than  do 
the  middle  and  lower  economic  classes.  A  blow  at 
the  country  is  more  of  a  blow  at  them  than  at 
other  groups,  just  as  they  stand  to  lose  more  in 
the  country's  defeat  than  do  most  of  the  other 
groups.  And,  of  course,  the  power  of  economic 
interest  asserted  itself  in  many  other  no  less  in- 
tangible, but  no  less  compelling,  impulses  on  the 
question  of  America's  participation  or  continued 
neutrality  in  the  war.  For  instance,  membership 
in  upper-class  social  life  is  open  chiefly  to  the 
upper  economic  class ;  and  thus  an  attitude  toward 
the  World  War  receiving  its  first  stimulus  from 
economic  interest  became  identified  with  an  at- 
titude imposed  by  upper-class  social  conventions. 
The  economic  interpretation  of  history  is  certain- 
ly not  the  least  substantial  of  the  stones  composing 
the  Marxian  arch;  but  the  Socialist  movement  will 
come  to  grief,  indeed,  has  already  come  to  grief, 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  111 

by  not  appreciating  that  impulses  in  the  human, 
bosom  due  to  economic  self-interest  must  run  the 
gamut  of  so  many  illogical  emotions  before  they 
come  to  the  surface,  that  by  that  time  they  may 
become  translated  into  actions  diametrically  op- 
posed to  economic  self-interest. 

Now  that  the  holocaust  is  over,  it  has  pain- 
fully become  more  and  more  incontrovertible  that 
its  underlying  causes  were  economic.  The  ex- 
pansion of  national  markets  into  international 
markets;  the  internationalization  of  capital, 
finance  and  credit ;  the  competition  between  the  big 
business  units  of  one  country  and  those  of  another 
country,  in  both  cases  supported  by  their  Govern- 
ments, for  raw  materials  from  the  industrially 
undeveloped  and  politically  helpless  regions  of 
the  earth ;  the  political  subjugation  of  those  coun- 
tries in  order  to  attain  the  subjugation  of  their 
Labor,  these  were  the  primary  factors  responsible 
for  the  division  of  Europe  into  an  armed  camp  on 
the  balance  of  power  system, — and  from  that  sys- 
tem only  a  great  international  military  struggle 
could  finally  flow.  Even  the  militarism  of  Ger- 
many and  Germany's  boorish  aggressiveness  had 
their  roots  deep  down  in  the  lateness  and  extreme 
rapidity  with  which  the  industrial  revolution  de- 
veloped in  that  country.  But  these  were  the  fac- 
tors influencing  but  the  few  who  developed  the 
system;  they  affected  but  slightly  the  decision  of 
the  masses  in  the  respective  belligerent  countries 


112  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

to  support  the  war  and  to  see  it  through.  And 
without  that  decision  of  the  masses,  the  War 
would  have  been  impossible.  How  important  a 
role  in  causing  the  War  was  played,  for  instance, 
by  the  feeling  for  nationality,  and  how  illogically 
and  sentimentally  free  from  economic  considera- 
tions of  self-interest  is  that  national  conscious- 
ness! 

Only  in  such  psychological  terms  can  the  popu- 
lar support  and  prosecution  of  the  War,  and  the 
popular  attitude  toward  the  peace,  be  explained. 
Very  tediously  has  man  built  up  inhibitions 
against  the  savage  impulses  which  dominated  him 
when  he  swung  by  his  tail  in  the  tree-tops,  and 
those  inhibitions  are  still  in  their  incipient  and 
feeble  stage.  At  those  moments  when  the  savage 
impulses  are  roused  from  their  slumber,  the  bar- 
riers against  them  collapse  all  too  readily  before 
their  onslaught.  And  the  inhibitions  necessitated 
by  our  development  out  of  the  state  of  greater 
savagery  are  unpleasant  as  well  as  weak.  We 
chafe  against  their  restrictions  upon  us,  become 
increasingly  irritable  when  the  restrictions  re- 
main unbroken  unduly  long,  and  consciously  or 
unconsciously  hope  for  the  day  when  once  more 
the  impulses  of  the  tree-top  days  can  reign  un- 
I  checked.  We  itch  to  hate,  to  torture,  to  kill,  to 
llpunish.  To  dwell  in  peace  and  amity  with  our 
neighbors  becomes  a  severe  strain,  and  the  longer 
the  peace  and  amity  the  severer  the  strain.  Those 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  113 

of  our  neighbors  who  differ  from  us  in  appear- 
ance, speech,  habits,  or  outlook  on  life  are  particu- 
larly obnoxious,  for  their  dissimilarity  from  us 
impresses  us  as  a  direct  insult  to  and  attack  on 
our  own  appearance,  our  own  speech,  our  own 
habits,  our  own  outlook  on  life,  and  hence  as  an 
insult  to  and  an  attack  on  us;  and  when  War 
with  them  threatens,  we  secretly  exult — Up,  the 
War! 

So  the  war  against  Germany.  How  fervently 
the  people  of  the  United  States,  after  some  months 
in  war,  hissed  the  assertion  they  had  applauded 
when  they  entered  the  struggle,  that  we  had  no 
quarrel  with  the  German  people,  but  only  with  the 
German  Government !  How  irresistibly  they  swept 
their  President  along  to  declare  in  the  summer 
of  1919  that  the  German  people  were  responsible 
for  the  crimes  of  their  Government,  the  same 
President  who  had  solemnly  declared  in  the  spring 
of  1917  that  they  were  not  thus  responsible! 
While  we  were  neutral,  most  of  us  agreed  that 
the  best  peace  after  the  war  would  be  a  peace 
without  victory.  While  we  were  belligerents,  we 
scorned  the  very  phrase — the  case  for  a  peace 
without  victory  was  as  good  after  April  6,  1917, 
as  before  it,  but  we  no  longer  desired  the  best 
peace.  We  wanted  the  peace  that  would  best 
satiate  our  wholly-released  savage  instinct  to  ap- 
ply the  maximum  punishment  to  our  opponent. 
Was  our  deliberate  starvation  of  German  women 


114  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

and  children  for  months  after  the  armistice  un- 
Christian  and  barbarous? — We  rejoiced  that  we 
had  overthrown  the  Christian  repressions  and  we 
wallowed  exultingly  in  our  barbarian  orgy  of  hate. 
Did  we  obscenely  lie  about  Soviet  Kussia,  un- 
necessarily blockade  it,  unethically  invade  it? — • 
What  matter?  Had  it  not  helped  our  enemies,  and 
at  all  events,  did  it  not  have  conceptions  radically 
different  from  ours?  Did  we  solemnly  pledge  to 
Germany  certain  terms  of  peace  if  she  should  sur- 
render, and  then  solemnly  scatter  our  pledges  to 
the  wind  as  so  many  scraps  of  paper? — Well, 
hadn't  we  won  and  the  Germans  lost?  And  how 
much  more  satisfactory  and  pleasant  to  break  than 
to  preserve  awkward  pledges  to  our  enemies !  Did 
the  Allies'  peace-terms  really  redound  to  their  own 
disadvantage  by  crippling  Germany  so  that  she 
couldn't  pay  her  debts  to  them? — It  was  more 
delightful  to  gratify  our  hate  to  our  own  hurt 
than  to  thwart  our  hate  to  our  own  advantage. — 
To  explain  a  nation's  actions  on  the  brink  of,  dur- 
ing, and  after  a  war  by  economic  motives  has 
proved  as  inadequate  as  explaining  childbirth 
by  the  story  of  the  Garden  of  Eden.  A  war  trans- 
forms a  twentieth-century  nation  into  a  prehistoric 
nation;  it  invalidates  almost  every  disquisition 
which  might  have  been  true  of  the  nation  in  the 
pre-war  days;  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye,  it 
eclipses  Marx  by  the  old  Adam.  In  the  face  of 
war,  the  reasoning  of  the  non-Socialist  pacifists 


THE  MAEXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  115 

proved  far  more  reliable  than  that  of  the  non- 
pacifist  Socialists. 

A  less  debatable  and  less  disputatious  example 
may  be  afforded  by  the  recent  agitation  for 
armed  intervention  in  Mexico.  The  Socialists  ex- 
plain that  agitation,  and  attempt  to  meet  it,  on 
the  ground  that  it  is  inspired  only  by  motives  of 
pecuniary  gain.  Now,  the  mainspring  of  that  agi- 
tation is,  of  course,  the  protection  of  American 
property  in  Mexico;  so  that  naturally  no  sur- 
prise arises  when  the  enthusiasm  for  intervention 
is  found  chiefly  among  the  upper  economic  classes, 
with  the  middle  economic  classes  lukewarm  to  the 
project,  and  with  Labor  and  Agriculture  inclined 
to  be  antagonistic.  And  yet  no  argument  is  re- 
quired to  prove  that  only  a  minute  section  of  the 
propertied  class  would  be  directly  benefited  by 
intervention  in  Mexico,  and  that  the  great  ma- 
jority of  the  propertied  class  bent  on  interven- 
tion would  stand  to  lose  by  it.  The  difficulties  of 
the  task  would  obviously  be  prodigious,  and  the 
length  of  time  required  would  be  great,  so  that  the 
expense  of  the  adventure  would  be  enormous.  And 
the  propertied  class  cherishes  no  illusion  that 
the  greater  part  of  that  expense  could  be  met 
except  by  taxation  which  would  fall  most  heavily 
upon  them.  Certainly,  the  great  majority  of  the 
propertied  class  possesses  no  share  of  American 
investments  in  Mexico,  and  it  may  well  be  doubted 
if  most  of  the  interventionists  are  sufficiently 


116  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

clear-visioned  and  far-sighted  to  appreciate  that 
the  investments  they  have  made  outside  of  Mex- 
ico might  eventually  become  more  valuable  by  dint 
of  cheaper  oil,  cheaper  coal,  and,  primarily, 
cheaper  and  unorganized  labor  from  the  occupa- 
tion of  Mexico.  Probably  more  of  them  realize 
that  American  business  interests  would  be  injured 
by  the  anger  in  South  America  at  an  attack  upon 
Mexico. 

Their  enthusiasm  for  intervention  has  probably 
come  to  the  surface  rather  by  way  of  "  conscious- 
ness of  kind,"  the  clan  instinct.  They  are  aware 
that  there  are  owners  of  property  in  Mexico  who 
stand  to  gain  by  intervention  or,  more  pertinently, 
who  may  stand  to  suffer  serious  loss  without  in- 
tervention. (It  is  irrelevant  that  this  possibility 
of  property  loss  without  intervention  may  not  be 
well-founded — propaganda  has  made  it  as  real  to 
the  minds  of  the  propertied  interventionists  as  if 
it  were  undeniable.)  They  also  are  owners  of 
property;  and  although  their  property  is  not  in 
Mexico,  yet  they  vaguely  feel  a  kinship  binding 
them  to  the  Mexican  property-holders.  That  feel- 
ing of  kinship  is  rendered  all  the  stronger  by  the 
recognition  of  the  intensity  of  the  class  struggle 
in  this  day  and  generation,  and  by  the  conscious- 
ness that  all  those  who  have  are  being  attacked  all 
over  the  world  by  all  those  who  have  not.  It  is 
the  like-calling-to-like  instinct,  the  awarenesA  of 
a  common  bond,  functioning  today  on  Mexico  as 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  117 

several  decades  ago,  and  still  in  the  sentimental 
fiction  of  today,  it  functioned  so  as  to  impel  the 
Kentucky  mountaineer  to  defend  his  cousin  from 
the  law-officer,  even  to  the  apparent  injury  of 
his  own  interests.  And  the  social  bond  also  makes 
its  strength  felt.  The  owners  of  Mexican  property 
adhere  chiefly  to  the  upper  social  classes ;  it  be- 
comes almost  social  treason,  almost  a  breach  of 
social  etiquette,  for  the  remainder  of  those  classes 
not  to  fall  in  with  a  movement  so  dear  and  so 
valuable  to  their  fellows. 

It  is  not  only  in  thus  sticking  too  rigidly  to  the 
economic  interpretation  of  history  that  the  Social- 
ist Party  of  America  has  rendered  its  attitude  to- 
ward current  phenomena  and  movements  so  large- 
ly futile.  Its  interpretation  of  events  and  hence 
its  ability  to  assume  a  position  of  leadership  in 
the  United  States  are  weakened  by  a  too  literal 
application  of  the  class  struggle  doctrine.  Now, 
there  can  be  little  doubt  that  the  capitalist  system 
is  permeated  through  and  through  by  a  conflict 
between  those  who  primarily  own  and  those  who 
primarily  work.  So  long  as  one  group  in  the  com- 
munity owns  most  of  the  property  and  capital 
necessary  to  production,  and  another  group,  with 
no  such  ownership,  must  sell  its  labor  to  the  first 
group,  so  long  will  the  interests  of  the  two  groups 
conflict  at  many  points.  Until  ownership  in  pro- 
duction belongs  either  to  both  groups  engaged  in 
production,  or  to  neither  group,  or  until  the  two 


118  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

groups  coalesce  into  one  group  which  shall  be  at 
the  same  time  both  owners  and  workers,  so  long 
will  Capital  be  able  to  feather  its  own  nest  to  a 
great  extent  only  at  the  expense  of  Labor,  and 
to  a  great  extent  Labor  its  nest  only  at  the  expense 
of  Capital.  And  any  qualification  that  might  be 
demanded  in  this  statement  will  be  all  in  favor  of 
Labor.  For  although  Capital  can  obviously  benefit 
itself  by  exploiting  Labor,  yet  Capital  can  in  many 
ways  avoid  injury  if  Labor  should  exploit  it  by 
means  of  throwing  the  incidence  of  that  exploita- 
tion upon  the  shoulders  of  the  general  public. 

And  yet  the  class  struggle  works  too  loosely  for 
implicit  reliance  on  it  as  a  never-failing  guide  to 
the  interpretation  of  events  in  the  United  States. 
In  the  first  place,  the  Marxian  two-class  idea  has 
manifestly  been  exploded.  Marx,  it  will  be  re- 
called, prophesied,  and  built  his  brilliant  system 
partly  around  the  prophecy,  that  the  development 
of  capitalism  would  be  accompanied  by  the  grad- 
ual but  steady  disappearance  of  the  middle-class. 
Capital  would  tend  toward  overwhelming  concen- 
tration in  a  few  hands,  while  the  remainder  of 
the  population  would  become  dispossessed  prole- 
tarians, increasingly  exploited  and  increasingly 
miserable.  Now,  it  is  probably  in  the  United 
States  that  the  first  part  of  this  prophecy  has 
been  most  thoroughly  verified;  for  the  trusts  of 
the  United  States  have  developed  largely  as  Marx 
foresaw.  And  yet  it  is  probably  in  the  United 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  119 

States  that  the  second  part  of  this  prophecy  has 
been  most  thoroughly  discredited,  for  our  middle 
economic  class  has  most  persistently  refused  to 
disappear.  Indeed,  it  is  likely  that  the  middle  class 
in  the  United  States  has  even  proportionately 
increased  since  Marx's  day.  As  between  Capital 
and  Labor,  the  struggle  is  doubtless  inevitable, 
and  possibly  destined  to  become  increasingly  in- 
tense, until  the  capital  and  ownership  necessary  in 
production  and  distribution  become  public  capital 
and  ownership.  But  the  United  States  still  sup- 
ports an  extremely  large  middle-class,  which  in 
many  localities  is  so  numerous  that  it  decides  po- 
litical elections,  the  economic  interests  of  which 
are  strongly  bound  up  with  the  economic  interests 
of  neither  Labor  nor  Capital,  and  hence  the  actions 
of  which,  and  therefore  the  actions  of  the  nation 
as  a  whole,  cannot  be  understood  merely  by  a 
recognition  of  the  class  struggle. 

Secondly,  the  people  who  inhabit  the  United 
States  are  social  animals  to  a  greater  extent 
than  they  are  economic  men.  They  are  intimately 
and  closely  bound  together  in  social  groups,  the 
affiliations  of  which  hold  them  in  stricter  bondage 
than  their  business  or  economic  affiliations.  Even 
the  exceptional  business  man  who  braves  business 
hostility  by  breaking  business  conventions  will 
quake  at  the  mere  thought  of  breaking  the  social 
conventions  of  his  social  group.  The  independent 
of  spirit  and  revolutionary  of  actions  between  10 


120  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

A.M.  and  5  P.M.  become  as  dependent  of  spirit  and 
servile  of  action  between  6.30  P.M.  and  midnight 
as  the  dependent  and  servile  through  the  entire 
twenty-four  hours.  Acting  so  as  to  gain  the  ap- 
plause and  escape  the  censure  of  all  our  immediate 
groups,  we  yet  heed  the  social  group  more  obe- 
diently than  the  business  group.  Of  course,  the 
social  group  has  cohered  chiefly  from  the  same 
economic  class,  but  "chiefly ".and  not  "wholly." 
Considerations  of  family  history  and  intellectual 
achievement  or  position  often  enter,  and  on  oc- 
casion lack  of  social  graces  and  savoir  faire  will 
make  even  the  economically  eligible  ineligible  for 
membership.  Even  the  extent  to  which  social, 
grouping  follows  economic  grouping  is  due  largely 
not  to  any  snobbish  desire  to  exclude  the  less  for- 
tunate, but  to  the  social  awkwardness  which  arises 
when  one  member  of  a  party  is  unable  to  meet,  or 
will  suffer  by  meeting,  his  share  of  expenditures 
which  rest  lightly  upon  the  others.  The  upper 
economic  classes  are  apt  to  exclude  from  their 
social  functions  the  individual  of  the  middle  eco- 
nomic class  primarily  because  the  former  knows, 
and  knows  that  the  latter  knows,  that  the  latter 
cannot  well  repay  a  social  obligation  in  kind. 
Again  economic  status  becomes  modified  by  the 
grouping  which  finally  dominates  and  determines 
action. 

The  class  consciousness  which  the  undeniable 
class  struggle  has  produced  is  thus  much  more 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  121 

a  social  class   consciousness   than  .gin   economic 
class  consciousness.    One  has  only  to  Jobk  at  most 
of  the  political  campaigns  in  the  United  Spates, 
particularly  in  the  municipal  and  state  elections, 
to  realize  that  fact.     The  bulk  of  the  electorate, 
middle  economic  class  and  lower  economic  class, 
dislikes  a  "silk  stocking"  more  than  a  "plute." 
If  the  candidate  seems  upper  class  by  social  affilia- 
tion,  and  more  particularly  by  personality,  al- 
though not  of  the  tipper  class  financially,  his  case 
is  more  desperate  than  if  his  worldly  jpessessions 
are  great,  but  his  social  affiliations  and  personality 
seem  of  the  earth,  earthy.     Theodore  Roosevelt 
might  have  been  of  the  multi-millionaires,  with 
large  investments  in  all  of  our  trusts,  without 
thereby  losing  any  appreciable  amount  of  his  re- 
markably tenacious  hold  upon  the  rank  and  file 
of  America.     Likewise,  the  college  professor  of 
the  type  dear  to  cartoonists,  or  the  Bostonian 
Mayflower  descendant  of  the  type  dear  to  profes- 
sional humorists,  would  find  the  popular  mind  ar- 
rayed against  him,  no  matter  how  slim  his  bank 
account.  "Al"  Smith  defeats  his  Republican  rival 
for  the  Governorship  of  New  York  State,  in  an 
otherwise  Republican  year,  largely  by  dint  of  re- 
peating that  he  was  a  worker  while  his  opponent 
was  a  college  student;  and  it  was  chiefly  the  pro- 
letariat which  supported  Henry  Ford  for  Senator 
from  Michigan.    And  when  the  innate  resentment 
against  the  upper  classes  can  readily  be  gal- 


122  THE  LAEGEE  SOCIALISM 

vanized,  with  the  result  of  gaining  votes,  it  is  the 
Kepublican  or  Democratic  politician  who  arouses 
it  and  corrals  the  votes.  He  does  so  by  an  appeal 
to  the  consciousness  of  social  kind,  while  the 
Socialist  propaganda,  by  printed  or  spoken  word, 
based  on  consciousness  of  economic  kind  falls  flat 
and  deaf  upon  the  ears  of  most  of  the  very  prole- 
tariat. Until  the  Socialist  Party  of  America  can 
attune  its  appeal  largely  to  social  class  grouping 
rather  than  solely  to  economic  class  grouping,  its 
vote  will  continue  to  be  chiefly  a  mere  protest  vote. 
Thus,  to  revert  again  to  the  problem  presented 
the  Socialists  by  the  possibility  of  America's  par- 
ticipation in  the  World  "War,  the  Socialist  Party 
of  America  signally  failed  to  evaluate  adequately 
the  impulses,  worthy  or  unworthy,  which  finally 
inclined  most  Americans  to  the  cause  of  the  En- 
tente Allies.  The  question  as  to  whether  Socialist 
opposition  to  American  participation  was  justified 
or  unjustified  is  for  the  moment  beside  the  point. 
Granted  that  the  Socialists  had  determined  upon 
opposition,  the  problem  was  to  understand  what 
to  oppose;  and  by  concentrating  upon  the  eco- 
nomic factor,  the  Socialists  overlooked  the  power 
and  effect  of  social  grouping  in  the  United  States. 
For  the  ability  of  the  upper  social  circles  qua  upper 
social  circles  to  mould,  dominate  and  guide  public 
opinion  in  the  United  States  can  hardly  be  over- 
estimated. Now,  in  the  upper  social  circles  in 
this  country,  the  French  and  the  British  before 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  123 

August  1,  1914,  and  before  April  6,  1917,  played, 
as  they  still  play,  prominent  roles,  more  prominent 
than  the  roles  played  by  the  Germans.  Similarly, 
Americans  of  British  and  of  French  descent  were 
everywhere  to  be  found  in  "high  society,"  where- 
as our  "  German- Americans "  had  acclimated 
themselves  chiefly  to  the  middle-class  social  life. 
Even  wealthy  "  German-  Americans, "  on  the 
whole,  were  conspicuous  largely  by  their  absence 
in  "high  society."  Moreover,  the  United  States 
had  been  systematically  and  efficiently  tapped  for 
succor  to  Belgium.  In  order  to  raise  the  largest 
possible  amount  for  the  Belgian  relief,  recourse 
for  funds  was  had,  quite  legitimately,  to  the  power 
of  upper  social  grouping ;  and  obviously  it  was  im- 
possible to  feel  pity  for  the  Belgians,  even  where 
that  pity  had  to  be  artificially  stimulated,  without 
feeling  resentment  against  those  who  were  pri- 
marily responsible  for  the  plight  of  the  Belgians. 
I  am  not  maintaining  that  the  American  Social- 
ists' course  of  action  could  have  been  shaped 
differently  or  more  effectively  if  they  had  been 
intellectually  capable  of  recognizing  the  true  align- 
ment of  the  forces  against  them.  The  question  is 
simply  one  of  demonstrating  how  the  Socialist 
Party,  through  complete  reliance  upon  the  eco- 
nomic interpretation  of  history  and  the  economic 
class  struggle,  was  led  into  false  appreciation  and 
evaluation  of  the  most  serious  crisis  in  America's 
history  which  it  could  possibly  have  been  called 


124  THE  LAKGER  SOCIALISM 

upon  to  face.    And  the  class  struggle  and  the  eco- 
nomic interpretation  of  history  are  probably  the 
least  vulnerable  points  of  the  Marxian  system.    It 
is  an  ungracious  task  to  pick  flaws  in  one  of  the 
confessedly  most  notable  achievements  in  the  en- 
tire intellectual  history  of  the  race,  dazzling  in  its 
brilliancy,  stirring  in  its  comprehensiveness,  awe- 
inspiring  in  its  originality.    And  yet  the  truth  is 
that  the  Marxian  explanation  of  panics  and  the 
Marxian   labor   theory    of   value   have   likewise 
proved  inadequate.    Most  of  our  business  depres- 
sions doubtless  could  have  been  explained  by  the 
Marxian  diagnosis  of  preceding  overproduction, 
but  other  causes  also  have  had  their  effect — in 
particular,  currency  and  credit  inflation.   Indeed, 
probably  only  measures  looking  toward  deflation 
forestalled  a  panic  in  the  United  States  ^n  1920, 
a  panic  which  would  have  occurred  at  a  time 
when  the  United  States  and  the  entire  world  was 
clamoring  for  increased  production  as  a  result  of 
the  preceding  five  years  of  underproduction  of 
necessities.     Similarly,    the   Marxian    theory   of 
surplus  value  in  its  pristine  form  has  been  sin- 
cerely rejected  by  most  economists,  and  the  few 
who  have  been  able  to  accept  it  have  been  obliged 
to  do  so  only  with  reservations.    The  proportion 
of  the  value  of  goods  due  to  the  labor  spent  on- 
producing  them  is  incontrovertibly  greater  than 
the  share  from  the  sale  of  them  now  given  to 
the  workers  for  that  labor,  but  all  their  value  can 


THE  MARXIAN  CAST  OF  THOUGHT  125 

hardly  be  assigned  to  the  labor  utilized  on  them. 
Moreover,  even  if  the  Marxian  surplus  value 
creed  were  flaw-proof,  for  the  practical  purposes 
of  a  political  platform  and  the  conversion  of  the 
bulk  of  the  electorate  in  political  and  educational 
campaigns,  it  would  be  useless.  For  as  Marx  pre- 
sented it,  it  is  and  must  remain  quite  incompre- 
hensible to  all  except  the  initiate.  So  far  as  the 
realizable  aims  of  the  Socialist  movement  in  Amer- 
ica are  concerned,  no  theory  which  is  totally  be- 
yond the  mental  capabilities  of  the  bulk  of  the 
populace  need  be  considered  true.  There  is  a  com- 
mon-sense theory  of  surplus  value  which  main- 
tains that  Labor  is  paid  too  little  and  Capital  too 
much  for  their  respective  shares  in  production  and 
distribution;  and  since  this  theory  may  be  made 
to  appeal  to  the  understanding  of  the  electorate, 
and  since  Marx's  theory  of  surplus  value  cannot 
be  so  made  to  appeal,  for  the  purposes  of  the  So- 
cialist political  program  the  common-sense  theory 
is  true  and  the  Marxian  theory  is  not  true.  It  is 
idle  to  instance  in  rebuttal  of  this  point  of  view 
the  picture  of  Darwin  shaking  the  whole  world 
from  his  hilltop  by  his  enunciation  of  new  and 
revolutionizing  biological  truths.  Darwin's  task 
was  merely  to  convince  the  men  of  science — lay- 
men, confessing  their  inability  to  pass  judgment 
upon  biology,  would  finally  accept  the  verdict  of 
the  professional  scientific  minds  upon  evolution, 
after  their  first  hectic  and  involuntary  rallying 


126  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

to  the  support  of  the  Bible.  And  the  Darwinian 
theory  of  evolution  was  comprehensible  to  the 
minds  of  the  men  of  science.  But  in  the  realm 
of  politics,  under  our  system  of  democracy  to 
which  the  Socialist  Party  of  America  renders  al- 
legiance, the  jury  is  everybody,  and  it  accepts 
no  one's  judgment  but  its  own,  or  what  it  be- 
lieves to  be  its  own.  If  the  majority  of  Ameri- 
can voters  are  to  register  approval  of  the  Marxian 
theory  of  surplus  value,  they  must  first  under- 
stand it;  and  since  they  cannot  possibly  under- 
stand it,  the  Socialist  movement  in  the  United 
States  may  well  relegate  that  theory  to  the  limbo 
of  the  seminar  and  the  library. 

No  thought-system  of  the  past  can  be  completely 
relied  upon  for  guidance,  no  matter  how  magnifi- 
cent, no  matter  how  adequate  for  the  generation 
which  ushered  it  in  and  for  the  immediately  fol- 
lowing generations,  no  matter  whether  it  be  Chris- 
tianity or  Marxism.  The  Socialist  Party  of  Amer-t 
ica,  until  it  can  free  itself  from  the  Marxian  cast 
of  thought,  can  hardly  attain  or  deserve  to  attain 
a  position  of  leadership  in  America. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR. 

THE  inevitable  result  of  this  dogmatically  de- 
ductive cast  of  Socialist  thought  in  the  United 
States  is  nowhere  more  vividly  typified  than  in  the 
Socialist  attitude  toward  the  participation  of  the 
United  States  in  the  World  War.  For  this  reason, 
an  extended  scrutiny  of  that  attitude  will  be  re- 
munerative. As  above,  for  the  sake  of  the  argu- 
ment, the  question  of  the  rectitude  and  advisabil- 
ity of  Socialist  opposition  to  America's  participa- 
tion may  be  ignored.  Granted  that,  from  the 
Socialist  point  of  view,  support  of  America's  war 
against  Germany  was  out  of  the  question,  on  what 
grounds,  by  what  reasoning  and  in  what  manner 
could  and  should  the  Socialist  Party  have  with- 
held its  support  of  the  War? 

The  Party's  answer  to  this  query  is  embodied 
in  the  so-called  War  Platform  adopted  by  special 
convention  at  St.  Louis  on  April  11,  1917,  five 
days  after  the  United  States  was  officially  at  war 
with  the  Imperial  German  Government.  By  the 
provisions  of  the  constitution  of  the  Socialist 
Party,  the  platform  after  adoption  by  the  coriven- 

127 


128  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

tion  had  to  be  submitted  to  a  referendum  of  the 
Party  membership.  It  was  so  submitted,  together 
with  the  minority  or  pro-war  resolution;  and  the 
announcement  that  the  majority  anti-war  platform 
had  been  ratified  by  the  referendum,  and  thus 
finally  adopted  by  the  Party,  was  made  on  July 
7,  1917. 

But  before  entering  upon  a  discussion  of  the 
St.  Louis  Platform,  I  must  crave  the  indulgence  of 
a  personal  admission  that  I  do  so  only  with  diffi- 
dence. Diffidence  arises  not  merely  from  the  fear 
that  one  may  be  but  wise-af  ter-the-event ;  but  also 
from  the  realization  that,  however  sincerely  a 
writer  in  1921  may  attempt  to  re-create  for  his 
discussion  the  conditions  obtaining  in  1917,  the 
solemn  and  depressing  events  of  the  elapsing  four 
years  cannot  be  altogether  shoved  out  of  con- 
sciousness. At  all  events,  one  personal  statement 
at  this  point  is  due  the  reader  no  less  than  the 
writer.  Although  disapproving  of  much  of  the 

^course  of  action  it  demanded,  as  a  member  of 
the  Socialist  Party  I  voted  for  the  adoption  of 

.  the  St.  Louis  Platform  in  1917:  and  today,  still 
a  member  of  the  Socialist  Party,  if  faced  again 
by  the  predicament  existing  in  1917  and  with  no 
other  alternative  available  than  that  available  in 
1917, 1  should  today,  still  a  member  of  the  Social- 
ist Party  and  still  reluctantly,  again  vote  for  its 
adoption. 
Before  passing  directly  to  a  consideration  of 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  129 

the  statements  of  the  St.  Louis  Platform,  however, 
it  may  be  profitable  to  notice  the  date  of  its  for- 
mulation. The  convention  by  which  the  platform 
was  adopted  did  not  assemble  until  five  days  after 
the  President  of  the  United  States  had  asked  Con- 
gress to  pass  a  resolution  declaring  a  state  of  war 
with  the  Imperial  German  Government.  That  he 
would  make  such  a  request  was  no  secret.  Since 
the  dismissal  of  Ambassador  von  Bernstorff  in  the 
preceding  February,  it  was  evident  that  war  would 
be  declared — indeed,  President  Wilson's  action 
in  calling  a. special  session  of  Congress  was  elo- 
quent of  purpose.  Now,  any  course  pursued  by 
the  Socialist  Party  of  America  or  by  any  other  or- 
ganization desiring  to  exert  influence  on  Amer- 
ica's entrance  into  the  War  would  be  effective 
only  if  taken  before  the  request  to  declare  war 
and  the  consequent  proclamation  of  War.  That 
was  particularly  true  if  the  course  pursued  were 
to  be  in  opposition  to  war  participation.  For,  as 
the  Socialists  have  learned  to  their  cost,  opposi- 
tion to  war  before  the  die  has  been  cast  is  toler- 
ated to  an  infinitely  greater  degree  than  opposi- 
tion once  war  has  been  declared.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  the  St.  Louis  Platform  proved  to  be  inef- 
fective, but  it  was1  ineffective  largely  because  it 
was  framed  a,nd  adopted  after  the  United  States 
had  entered  the  war.  If  it  had  been  blared  forth 
before  April  2,  or  even  before  April  6,  1917,  it 
would  not  have  been  so  altogether  fruitless  as  it 


130  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

proved  in  affecting  public  opinion  in  the  United 
States. 

Now,  obviously  there  must  be  something  woe- 
fully deficient  in  the  mental  and  administrative 
capacity  of  a  political  party  twenty  years  old 
which  has  no  machinery  available  to  handle  a 
long-impending  and  long-foreseen  national  crisis 
until  too  late  for  action  to  be  effective.  For  var- 
ious causes,  adequate  or  inadequate,  the  national 
convention  of  the  Socialist  Party  which  should 
normally  have  met  in  the  Presidential  year  1916 
was  omitted.  In  spite  of  that  fact,  no  central 
executive  body  was  empowered  to  state  the 
Party's  position  even  subject  to  a  later  referen- 
dum, should  Germany's  grudging  promises  anent 
a  restricted  submarine  warfare  be  disregarded,  and 
should  the  United  States  accordingly  be  dragged 
into  war.  There  was  even  no  machinery  avail- 
able for  calling  an  emergency  convention  at  short 
notice — the  St.  Louis  gathering  did  not  finally 
convene  until  more  than  two  months  after  von 
Bernstorff  had  been  handed  his  passports.  The 
reason  lay  in  the  all-pervading  Socialist  mistrust 
of  leadership,  even  its  own  leadership.  The  con- 
stitution of  the  Party  provided  and  still  provides 
that  practically  every  significant  action,  and  many 
insignificant  actions,  must  be  determined  by  a 
referendum  of  the  Party  membership.  And  what- 
ever the  undeniable  virtues  of  referenda,  they  do 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  131 

not  make  for  sane  and  rapid  action  in  face  of  an 
emergency. 

Let  it  be  granted  that  it  would  have  been  grossly 
improper  to  commit  the  Party  with  finality  to  a 
position  on  the  War  without  registering  the  votes 
of  the  Party  membership.  Nevertheless,  there  was 
dire  need  for  the  Party  to  be  placed  tentatively 
on  record  before  War  or  Peace  was  voted  upon — 
as,  in  fact,  for  all  practical  purposes  the  Party  was 
committed  to  its  course  on  the  War  by  the  adoption 
of  the  War  Platform  by  the  St.  Louis  Convention, 
even  before  it  was  ratified  by  the  referendum.  It 
was  the  tardiness  in  convenin'g  the  St.  Louis  Con- 
vention which  was  criminally  negligent;  and  it  is 
little  defense  to  explain  that  the  date  on  which  the 
special  session  of  Congress  was  to  meet  had  been 
advanced  several  weeks.  A  well-organized  trade 
union  calls  a  national  strike  only  with  the  assent 
of  the  membership  in  a  "referendum,  but  also  it 
gives  the  central  executive  the  authority  to  make 
the  decision  under  certain  circumstances  which 
can  be  foretold. 

The  experiences  of  the  last  decades  with  the  ap- 
plication of  political  democracy  have  shown  that 
effectiveness  is  impossible  unless  the  leaders  have 
authority  and  responsibility ;  and  the  political  or- 
ganization which  cannot  in  less  than  two  months 
even  preliminarily  take  a  position  on  a  vital  ques- 
tion where  "time  is  of  the  essence"  is  a  political 
organization  which  must  still  travel  a  long  dis- 


132  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

tance  before  it  can  be  trusted  with  power.  In  no 
Socialist  Local  whose  meetings  I  happen  to  have 
•  attended  (and  I  can  speak  merely  from  my  own  ex- 
perience) has  there  been  machinery  for  handling 
efficiently  even  the  routine  business  of  a  ward 
organization.  Small  printers'  bills,  payment  for 
rent  and  light,  the  phraseology  of  a  letter  to  a 
delinquent  Comrade,  all  are  thrown  open  to  the 
discussion  of  a  full  meeting.  One  reason  why 
Socialist  Locals  are  largely  futile  in  converting 
their  neighborhoods  is  that  they  are  usually  so 
poorly  organized  that  it  is  almost  midnight  before 
even  the  routine  business  of  inner  picayune  admin- 
istration has  been  disposed  of.  It  is  the  inevita- 
ble result  of  a  mental  outlook  focussed  on  a  dogma. 
The  mind  which  trusts  the  analyses  of  a  nine- 
teenth-century Marx  to  interpret  twentieth-cen- 
tury events  is  involuntarily  disposed  to  meet  the 
demand  for  immediate  and  concrete  action  by 
means  of  uncritical  reliance  upon  an  abstract  prin- 
ciple of  action  such  as  the  referendum.  The  So- 
cialist Party  of  America  could  not  release  itself 
from  its  shackles  of  involved  and  lengthy  pro- 
cedure, even^o  register  opposition  to  its  most 
hideous  nightmare,  "War,  before  it  was  too  late, 
because  its  mental  processes  were  not  flexible. 

After  which  preamble,  the  St.  Louis  Resolution 
itself  may  bo  considered.  It  opens  by  an  analysis 
of  the  underlying  causes  of  the  War  as  a  whole 
which  will  be  less  and  less  vigorously  disputed  as 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  133 

the  terms  of  the  Treaties  of  Peace  impress  them- 
selves more  and  more  firmly  upon  popular  under- 
standing. Even  the  pro-war  liberals,  whose  con- 
demnation of  the  St.  Louis  Resolution  was  based 
on  reasoning  rather  than  on  emotional  anger,  ad- 
mit that  "If  you  want  to  know  what  a  war  was 
about,  study  the  terms  of  its  peace."  And  a  study 
of  the  terms  of  peace  of  the  Treaties  of  Versailles, 
St.  Germain  and  Sevres  is  sufficient  to  endorse  the 
St.  Louis  Resolution's  assertion  that  the  funda- 
mental cause  of  the  War  was  the  economic  and 
financial  rivalries  between  the  great  Powers. 
However,  the  dogmatism  of  the  St.  Louis  Resolu- 
tion led  it  to  ignore  the  role,  if  only  a  subsidiary 
role,  played  in  causing  the  War  by  psychological 
and  even  illogical  factors  of  an  uneconomic  kind. 
It  is  futile  to  attempt  to  account  for  the  World 
War,  for  instance,  without  paying  respects  to  the 
force  of  hatreds  of  one  race  by  another,  even  of 
one  nation  by  another  nation  of  the  same  race.  It 
is  even  futile  to  attempt  to  account  for  all  of  that 
hatred  by  economic  considerations,  just  as  it 
would  be  futile  to  attempt  to  account  for  much  of 
it  without  economic  considerations.  The  inter- 
necine economic  and  financial  rivalries  of  interna- 
tional Capitalism  account  for  all  the  Serbian 
hatred  of  the  Austro-Germans  of  the  old  Austro- 
Hungarian  monarchy,  for  all  the  French  hatred  of 
the  Germans,  for  all  the  German  hatred  of  the 
Russians,  as  inadequately  as  they  account  for  all 


134  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

• 

the  Irish  hatred  of  British  rule  or  for  all  the  con- 
sequent anti-British  feeling  in  the  United  States. 

Furthermore,  if  the  Socialist  Party  in  its  plat- 
form on  American  participation  in  the  World  War 
saw  fit  to  maintain  that  one  group  of  belligerents 
was  as  little  worthy  of  support  by  the  working- 
class  as  the  other,  it  could  have  founded  that  posi- 
tion on  a  much  firmer  rock  than  the  re-echo  of  the 
old  war-cry  against  the  deep-laid  plots  of  interna- 
tional capitalists.  It  might  well  have  analyzed  the 
well-being  of  the  masses  and  the  extent  of  the  dis- 
tribution of  happiness  in  fhe  Entente  countries  as 
contrasted  with  the  well-being  and  happiness-dis- 
tribution in  the  Central  Empires. 

On  this  whole  question  of  war  culpability,  how- 
ever, the  great  mass  of  Americans  would  have  been 
influenced  most  readily,  and  justifiably  so,  by  the 
determination  as  to  whether  Germany,  was  actu- 
ally the  direct  instigator  of  the  War.  To  all  paci- 
fist and  Socialist  reasoning  on  America's,  partici- 
pation, the  man  in  the  street  inevitably  retorted, 
"Well,  answer  me  this — didn't  Germany  begin  the 
War?"  It  was  therefore  highly  essential  that  the 
St.  Louis  Kesolution  should  be  meticulously  ex- 
plicit in  its  charge  that  the  most  influential  cause 
of  the  War  was  the  international  capitalist  sys- 
tem. The  mere  reiteration  of  the  phrase  in  gen- 
eral terms  was  not  enough.  There  should  have 
been  concrete  explanation  of  the  way  in  which  and 
why  the  markets  of  the  world  had  become  interna- 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  135 

tional  markets.  Of  the  reasons  why  all  the  great 
industrial  Powers  were  in  febrile  competition  for 
raw  materials  from  the  economically  undeveloped 
regions  of  the  earth.  Of  the  reasons  why  they  thus 
sought  political  control  of  those  regions.  Of  the 
way  in  which  and  why  control  of  waterways  like 
the  Dardanelles  was  the  cause  of  intricate  interna- 
tional machinations  by  a  Power  like  Tsarist  Rus- 
sia, which  was  an  agricultural  rather  than  an 
industrial  Power.  Of  the  way  in  which  the  busi- 
ness interests  of  the  great  Powers  could  exploit 
Labor  in  colonies  as  they  could  not  exploit  it  at 
home,  and  of  the  consequent  advantages  of  the 
business  interests  of  Powers  with  colonies  over 
those  of  Powers  without  .colonies.  Of  the  inter- 
national ramifications  of  Finance.  And,  finally 
and  above  all,  of  the  practical  control  of  the  gov- 
ernments of  all  the  great  belligerent  nations  by 
their  business  and  financial  interests. 

These  explanations  should  have  been  immedi- 
ately supported  by  concrete  examples.  There 
were  enough  to  hand.  For  instance,  the  part 
played  by  economic  factors  in  causing  the  Russo- 
Japanese  War;  the  international  ownership  of 
munition  plants;  particularly,  the  reasons  why 
p'ossession  of  Morocco  had  almost  set  off  the  War 
in  1905  and  again  in  1911;  the  political  and  eco- 
nomic slicing-up  of  China  by  all  the  great  Euro- 
pean Powers.  In  passing,  such  an  exposition 
would  have  constituted  the  most  valuable  propa- 


136  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

ganda  which  the  Socialist  Party  could  have  sown. 
For  the  Party's  propaganda  had  been  compara- 
tively barren  of  results,  both  because  it  had  not 
been  able  to  reach  a  sufficient  proportion  of  the 
population,  and  because  it  had  been  couched  in 
terms  too  vague  to  admit  of  popular  comprehen- 
sion. Obviously,  such  an  anti-war  resolution  as 
here  outlined,  adopted  before  the  declaration  of 
war,  would  have  been  spread  broadcast  over  the 
country,  and  would  have  explained  the  import  of 
the  Socialist  doctrine  by  timely  and  comprehensi- 
ble applications.  Also,  it  may  be  noted  that  this 
general  inculcation  of  Socialist  philosophy  into 
the  body  politic  might  have  served  to  hasten  the 
Socialist  recovery  from  the  unpopularity  which 
opposition  to  America's  participation  in  the  War 
was  bound  to  cause. 

Even  then,  of  course,  the  man  in  the  street 
would  have  demanded,  "Well,  maybe  you  Social- 
ists are  right  about  the  underlying  cause  of  the 
War,  but  can  you  deny  that  Germany  was  the  im- 
mediate cause?"  Certainly,  even  without  such  a 
query,  the  Socialist  Party  was  impelled  by  its  posi- 
tion on  the  War  to  analyze  the  immediate  as  well 
as  the  underlying  causes  of  the  struggle.  By  the 
time  of  the  St.  Louis  Convention,  the  diplomatic 
correspondence  preceding  the  major  declarations 
of  war  was  available  for  dissection,  even  though 
probably  only  in  expurgated  form.  As  against 
the  damning  evidence  of  German  support  of  the 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  137 

provocative  Austro-Hungarian  ultimatum  to  Ser- 
bia, the  Socialist  Party's  best,  if  not  only,  card 
was  an  exposition  of  Eussia's  guilt  in  causing 
general  German  mobilization,  which  had  long  been 
accepted  in  all  well-informed  European  circles  as 
the  well-nigh  inevitable  precursor  of  a  German 
declaration  of  war  on  Eussia.  Many  American 
minds  which  were  quite  passed  over  by  the  St. 
Louis  Eesolution's  phrases  regarding  Capital- 
ism's responsibility  for  causing  the  War  would 
have  been  caught  by  a  searchlight  on  Eussia's 
mobilization  on  the  German  border  as  well  as  on 
the  Austro-Hungarian  border  before  Germany  had 
yet  ordered  even  partial  mobilization.  Those 
minds  would  have  been  even  more  firmly  caught 
by  a  searchlight  on  the  ensuing  Eussian  failure 
even  to  answer,  within  the  time-limit  set,  the  Ger- 
man ultimatum  demanding  cessation  of  the  Eus- 
sian mobilization,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  Ger- 
many had  informed  Eussia  that  the  ultimatum 
itself  was  very  near  a  declaration  of  war. 

At  this  point,  it  may  be  noted  that  the  Socialist 
Party  did  not  oppose  an  American  declaration  of 
war  against  Germany  because  the  Socialists  were 
pacifists.  The  St.  Louis  Platform  declares  that 
the  only  war  in  which  the  working-class  will  be 
justified  in  engaging  is  a  war  between  the  classes. 
By  definite  implication,  therefore,  the  St.  Louis 
Platform  pledges  its"  support  to  a  war  which  may 
arise  to  settle  the  class  struggle.  The  Platform 


138  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

also  asserts  that  recent  wars  have  always  been 
"made  by  the  classes  and  fought  by  the  masses," 
and  that  "in  all  modern  history  there  has  been  no 
war  more  unjustifiable  than  the  one  in  which  we 
are  about  to  engage."  Concerning  these  exag- 
gerations, it  is,  of  course,  possible  to  be  hyper- 
critical ;  for  in  a  protest  platform  adopted  on  the 
brink  of  war,  a  certain  amount  of  hyperbole  is 
inevitable.  But  these  statements  are  more  than 
hyperbole — they  are  the  kind  of  sweeping  and  in- 
accurate generalities  which  throw  discredit  upon 
any  document  in  which  they  appear. 

It  may  furnish  an  anti-war  orator  emotional 
satisfaction,  as  well  as  a  text,  to  declare  that  all 
wars  are  "made  by  the  classes,  and  fought  by 
the  masses";  but  that  declaration  is  certainly  not 
true  of  the  last  war.  In  a  country  like  England, 
the  social  pressure  which  largely  compelled  enlist- 
ment in  the  pre-conscription  days  was  more  effec- 
tive upon  the  classes  than  upon  the  masses.  Pro- 
portionately, the  classes  probably  enlisted  in  more 
generous  numbers  than  did  the  masses,  although 
it  is  probably  true  also  that  the  classes  went 
largely  into  the  ranks  of  the  officers,  who,  after 
all,  suffered  less  in  the  fighting  than  did  the  pri- 
vates. And  after  the  adoption  of  conscription  in 
the  United  States  as  well  as  in  England,  the  call 
to  the  colors  fell  alike  upon  class  and  mass.  (Es- 
cape from  fighting  because  of  social  and  economic 
upper  class  membership  was  probably  more  prev- 


139 

alent  in  France  than  in  the  United  States  or  in 
England.)  And  the  ratio  of  those  who  were  ena- 
bled to  stay  at  home  because  of  the  essential  char- 
acter of  their  work  was  certainly  no  lower  among 
the  ranks  of  Labor  than  among  the  ranks  of  Capi- 
tal. 

On  the  other  hand,  little  exception  may  be  taken 
to  the  assertion  that  "in  all  modern  history  there 
has  been  no  war  more  unjustifiable  than  that  in 
which  we  are  about  to  engage."  Considering  the 
impetuous  advance  of  human  knowledge  since  the 
last  previous  great  international  war;  the  steady 
multiplication  of  international  ties  and  under- 
standings; the  comparatively  increased  material 
well-being  of  mankind;  the  absence  of  any  direct 
oppression  or  of  redemption  of  national  honor  as 
a  pressing  casus  belli;  the  power  of  the  organiza- 
tions and  organisms  working  toward  international 
peace;  the  fact  that  the  war  sprang  as  the  culmi- 
nation of  a  complicated,  carefully-planned  and 
well-constructed  division  of  Europe  into  two 
armed  camps  on  the  Balance  of  Power  system; 
the  fact  that  the  European  dynamite  had  very 
nearly  been  set  off  into  the  explosion  of  war  by 
the  Moroccan  spark  of  1905,  the  Bosnian  and 
Herzegovinian  spark  of  1908,  the  second  Moroccan 
spark  of  1911,  the  Turko-Italian  war  spark  of 
1911  and  the  Balkan  Wars  sparks  of  1912-13;  the 
fact  that  each  of  these  sparks  had  crept  nearer 
the  dynamite  than  its  predecessor;  the  fact  that 


140  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

therefore  the  explosion  of  1914  could  almost  with 
certainty  have  been  foretold  and  therefore  pre- 
vented— in  view  of  these  considerations,  the  war 
in  which  the  United  States  was  about  to  engage 
when  the  St.  Louis  Eesolution  was  adopted  was 
verily  as  unjustifiable  as  few  wars  of  history. 

But  the  language  of  this  section^of  the  Eesolu- 
tion was  obscure.  It  was  particularly  obscure 
when  read  in  the  context  of  the  preceding  and  fol- 
lowing statements  that  to  satisfy  the  capitalists' 
greed  for  gain,  they  had  dragged  America  into 
war  against  the  will  of  the  American  people.  And. 
it  was  obscure  when  read  in  the  high  emotion  and 
unreason  of  war-times.  I  have  met  Socialists,  and 
altogether  there  must  have  been  thousands  of 
them,  who  were  sincerely  and  immovably  under 
the  impression  that  the  St.  Louis  Anti-War  Reso- 
lution, for  which  they  had  voted,  asserted  that  it 
was  America's  entrance  into  the  lists  against  the 
German  Government  which  was  unprecedentedly 
unjustified.  Outside  of  the  Socialist  ranks,  even 
many  of  those  who  were  above  being  stampeded 
by  one  hundred  per  cent  American  patriotic  anti- 
Socialist  propaganda  were  under  the  same  im- 
pression. And  obviously  America's  declaration  of 
war  against  Germany  was  more  fully  justified  than 
most  war  declarations  in  the  past  had  been,  If 
the  Socialists  wished  to  maintain  that  all  such 
declarations  of  war  were  unjustified ;  that  war  be- 
cause of  insult  to  national  honor  was  as  obsolete 


141 

as  duels  because  of  insult  to  personal  honor;  that 
hence  nothing  vital  was  at  stake  save  the  predomi- 
nance of  one  group  of  nations'  capitalist  system 
over  another  and  similar  group's  capitalist  sys- 
tem— that  position  might  well  have  been  defended. 
But  if  any  wars  of  the  past  have  been  justified 
merely  on  the  grounds  of  national  avengement  of 
national  insult  and  of  violated  national  rights,  our 
war  on  the  Imperial  German  Government  was  so 
justified. 

There  has  already  been  discussed,  in  Chapter 
IV,  the  unreality  of  the  St.  Louis  Resolution's 
charge  that  America's  participation  in  the  War 
was  due  to  the  machinations  of  America's  capital- 
ist class.  The  latter  part  of  the  Eesolution  may 
therefore  next  be  considered.  It  is  concerned  with 
the  course  of  action  to  which  the  Socialist  Party 
of  America  pledged  itself;  and  it  is  this  part  to 
which  the  sharpest  exception  may  be  taken  by 
even  an  anti-war  member  of  the  Socialist  Party. 
The  Party  pledged  itself  to  "  continuous,  active 
and  public  opposition  to  the  War  .  .  .  through-  all 
means  in  our  power."  To  opposition  to  the  enact- 
ment of  conscription;  and,  shoiild  it  nevertheless 
coma,  to  "the  support  of  all  mass  movements  in 
opposition  to  conscription."  Finally, •  tlie  Party 
pledged  itself  to  "oppose  wit!?  all  our  strength" 
any  attempt  to  rai^;e  money  for  war  by  taxing 
the  necessities  of  life  or  by  issuing  bonds. 

Now,  at  the  time  when  the  St.  Louis  Resolution 


142  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

4  'S  ' 

was  framed,  the  Socialist  Party  of  America,  by 
the  very  essence  of  its  existence  as  a  political 
party,  placed,  as  it  still  places,  its  chief  reliance 
upon  political  action  for  the  accomplishment  of  its 
%nds.  It  differs  from  the  syndicalists,  the  I.  W. 
W.,  the  anarchists,  the  cooperatives,  the  Bolshe- 
vists, and  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  in 
that  it  concentrates  its  efforts  upon  the  verdict 
of  the  ballot-box.  In  other  words,  it  subscribes  to 
the  principles  of  political  democracy.  By  those 
principles,  the  minority  is  pledged  to  accept  the 
verdict  of  the  majority,  so  long  as  the  majority 
does  not  interfere  with  the  minority's  effort,  by 
political  procedure,  to  make  itself  the  majority. 
But  the  course  of  action  imposed  on  the  Socialist 
Party  by  the  St.  Louis  Eesolution  was  in  direct 
opposition  to  the  principles  of  political  democracy, 
and  hence  to  the  idea  on  which  the  Socialist  Party 
itself  is  founded.  In  opposition  to  the  prosecu- 
tion of  the  War,  to  the  enactment  and  enforcement 
of  military  and  industrial  conscription,  to  the  im- 
position of  war  taxation  on  necessities,  to  collec- 
tion of  war  loans,  the  Party  pledged  itself  to  go 
beyond  its  right  to  agitate  for  the  repeal  of  the 
objectionable  legislation  by  appeals  to  and  educa- 
tion of  the  electorate.  It  pledged  itself  to  more 
than  demonstrations  and  petitions.  It  pledged 
itself  to  "mass  movements"  and  all  other  means 
within  its  power  (whether  or  not  within  its  pre- 
rogative). 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  143 

All  due  regard  may  be  given  to  the  looseness 
of  phraseology  to  be  expected  from  a  special  con- 
vention of  a  mere  protesting  organization  still 
without  any  responsibility  or  power  in  the  proce- 
dure of  governing  the  nation ;  to  the  fact  that  the 
platform  was  framed  by  a  hastily-chosen  commit- 
tee, which  had  to  formulate  it  in  such  eloquent  lan- 
guage as  would  earn  the  commendation  of  an  ex- 
cited and  excitable  open  convention  of  more  than 
one  hundred  persons ;  to  the  warmth  of  controver- 
sial feeling  which  pervaded  the  country  at  the 
time  the  St.  Louis  Resolution  was  framed.  And 
yet,  with  all  regard  to  pardonable  exuberance  of 
language,  in  its  stand  on  the  War  the  Socialist 
Party  went  over  to  the  direct  actionists.  Although 
an  insignificant  minority  in  the  country,  it  pledged 
itself  to  disregard  the  registered  decision  of  the 
vast  majority,  and  to  upset  that  decision  before 
and  without  obtaining  a  mandate  to  that  effect  by 
the  democratic  procedure  of  a  show  of  hands.  The 
Socialist  Party  was  willing  to  achieve  its  ends  by 
use  of  its  sheer  power  in  exactly  the  method  which 
it  is  the  first  and  the  loudest  to  condemn  when  that 
method  is  employed  by  the  Steel  Corporation,  by 
the  capitalist  Press,  by  a  group  of  bankers  or  by 
a  strike-breaking  agency. 

Of  the  course  of  action  demanded  by  the  St. 
Louis  Resolution,  one  defense,  and  one  only,  is 
open  to  the  Socialist  Party.  The  Party  may  base 
its  disregard  of  the  procedure  of  political  democ- 


144  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

'racy  on  the  grounds  that  thnt  procedure  had  al- 
-  ready  been  disregarded  by  the  Republican  and 
Democratic  Parties  in  their  declaration  of  war. 
The  Congress  which  declared  war  had  been  elected 
in  time  of  peace,  when  America  seemed  to  have 
extricated  herself  from  the  danger  of  being  drawn 
into  the  European  holocaust.  Indeed,  in  that  elec- 
tion the  Democratic  administration  of  President 
Wilson  had  been  endorsed  by  the  electorate  after 
a  campaign  in  which  the  Democrats  had  relied 
largely  upon  the  slogan, '  '  He  kept  us  out  of  war. ' ' 
In  that  campaign,  the  Republicans,  who  had  up- 
braided President  Wilson  for  not  taking  a  firmer 
stand  toward  the  Imperial  German  Government, 
had  been  rejected  by  the  voters  of  the  country. 
With  much  show  of  justice,  the  St.  Louis  Resolu- 
tion might  have  insisted  that  only  by  an  advisory 
referendum,  or  by  the  results  of  a  number  of  rep- 
resentative special  Congressional  elections  in  dif- 
ferent sections  of  the  country,  would  the  principle 

-of  political  democracy  have  been  previously  ob- 
served in  the  declaration  of  war.  Objection  had 
been  raised  to  an  advisory  referendum  on  Peace  or 
War  because  no  machinery  for  it  was  available, 
and  because  it  would  be  impossible  to  create  that 
machinery  with  speed  and  adequate  safeguards 
against  fraud.  But  that  that  objection  was  in- 
valid was  proved  by  our  rapid  creation  of  machin- 
ery for  the  far  more  difficult  and  more  complicated 
procedure  of  registration  for  the  draft.  Indeed, 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  145 

in  view  of  my  strictures  on  the  St.  Louis  Besolu- 
tion,  at  this  point  I  again  crave  indulgence  for  a 
personal  reference.  I  believed  in  April,  1917,  and 
believe  today,  although  naturally  the  belief  cannot 
be  substantiated,  that  a  Peace-or-War  referendum 
held  before  Congress  had  declared  war  on  the  Im- 
perial German  Government,  a  referendum  in  which 
women  would  have  voted  on  the-  same  terms  as 
men,  would  have  declared  for  peace. 

But  the  Socialist  Party's  War  creed  indulged 
in  no  direct  reference  to  a  referendum,  nor  to 
any 'other  politically  democratic  method  of  deter- 
mining the  will  of  the  majority  of  American  vot- 
ers on  the  question  of  war.  With  such  a  reference, 
opposition  to  the  prosecution  of  the  War  by  the 
United  States  might  not  have  flown  so  flagrantly 
in  the  face  of  democratic  procedure.  Without  it, 
the  Socialist  Party  was  itself  declaring  war — war 
on  the  political  system  of  the  country.  For  to  stop 
our  prosecution  of  the  war,  the  St.  Louis  Eesolu- 
tion  was  relying  on  a  naked  test  of  strength — 
Socialist  strength  versus  Government  (or,  if  you 
will,  capitalist)  strength.  And  in  a  test  of  sheer 
strength  by  resort  to  war,  the  vanquished  can 
hardly  object  to  being  disarmed  by  the  victor. 
Since  the  Socialists  were  appealing  to  mass  action 
in  order  to  paralyze  the  Government's  (or  the  cap- 
italists') strength,  they  could  hardly  object  with 
propriety  when  the  Government  (or  the  capital- 
ists) in  return,  in  order  to  paralyze  the  Socialist 


146  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

strength,  appealed  to  mass  action  such  as  impris- 
onment and  denial  of  mail  privileges.  I  need 
hardly  add  that  it  is  one  thing  to  render  war  objec- 
tors impotent  to  injure  the  program  of  the  major- 
ity during  the  prosecution  of  a  war,  and  quite 
another  thing^to  inflict  ten  and  twenty  years'  jail 
sentences  upon  them  as  punishment  for  merely 
voicing  their  disagreement. 

Nor  could  the  Socialist  Party,  in  defence  of  the 
St.  Louis  Resolution,  fairly  point  to  the  sabotage 
of  public  opinion  by  Capitalism  through  the  press 
and  the  pulpit  and  the  movie  theatre.  It  may  be 
true  that  the  processes  of  political  democracy  de- 
pend for  their  validity  upon  a  public  opinion  which 
has  access  to  the  truth ;  and  that  at  present  most 
or  many  of  the  agencies  which  spread  informa- 
tion before  the  people  distort  the  truth.  But  if 
the  Socialist  Party  is  determined  to  play  the  game 
of  political  democracy,  it  must  abide  by  the  rules 
of  the  game.  (If  not,  let  it  previously  announce 
that  it  does  not  intend  to  abide  by  them  and  take 
the  consequences,  as  did  the  Communist  Party  and 
the  Communist  Labor  Party.)  If  the  capitalist 
pulpit,  the  capitalist  press  and  the  capitalist  movie 
will  not  impart  the  truth  about  the  Socialist  move- 
ment, the  Socialist  movement  must  organize  its 
own  press,  its  own  pulpit  and  its  own  movies.  By 
the  rules  of  the  game  of  political  democracy,  resort 
to  propaganda  qilU  propaganda  is  quite  legiti- 
mate; the  quintessence  of  political  democracy  is 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAE  147 

to  be  found  in  the  contest  between  the  most  highly- 
developed  propagandas.  When  one's  opponent 
resorts  to  propaganda,  one  is  justified,  not  in  aban- 
doning the  game,  but  in  resorting  to  counter-prop- 
aganda, and  may  the  best  propaganda  win !  If  the 
Socialist  Party  should  achieve  political  control  in 
the  United  States,  and,  even  illegitimately',  should 
use  that  control  to  influence  public  opinion,  the 
Socialist  Party  would  nevertheless  be  well  within 
its  rights  in  suppressing  the  Capitalist  Parties  if 
the  Capitalist  Parties  used  that  influencing  of  pub- 
lic opinion  as  an  excuse  for  disregarding  the  ver- 
dict of  the  ballot-box,  and  attempted  to  overthrow 
Socialism  by  means  of  such  mass  action  as  an  arti- 
ficially-created business  panic. 

Accordingly,  it  is  more  than  wisdom-after-the- 
event  to  suggest  that  the  Socialist  Party  of  Amer- 
ica could  have  expressed  its  opposition  to  Ameri- 
ca's participation  in  the  War  on  grounds  more  fun- 
damental than  those  of  the  St.  Louis  Eesolution, 
more  convincing  to  the  great  majority  of  the 
American  electorate,  and  more  fully  in  accord  with 
the  principles  and  practise  of  Socialism  itself. 
Surely,  even  in  March,  1917,  the  war  platform  of 
the  Socialist  Party,  after  tracing  and  proving  the 
economic  origin  of  the  War  and  the  overwhelm- 
ingly economic  character  of  the  true  issues  at  stake 
in  the  War,  after  analyzing  the  immediate  events 
which  led  directly  to  the  outbreak  of  hostilities, 
and  after  making  other  points  which  the  framers 


148  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

desired  to  have  it  make,  surely  the  Socialists'  plat- 
form would  have  better  served  both  the  cause  of 
peace  and  their  own  cause,  and  still  have  voiced 
the  opinions  of  the  great  bulk  of  the  Party  mem- 
bership on  the  War,  by  proceeding  in  some  such 
language  as  this : — 

"In  none  of  the  belligerent  countries,  nor  in  the 
United  States,  is  the  Government  devoted  to  the 
welfare  and  happiness  of  the  masses.  Bather,  the 
national  life  of  all  countries  under  the  capitalist 
system  is  so  organized  as  to  shower  wealth  upon 
the  few,  while  the  many  receive  merely  the  mini- 
mum necessary  to  keep  them  at  their  task  of  manu- 
facturing the  wealth  of  which  they  obtain  but  a 
proportion.  So  far  as  the  welfare  of  the  masses 
is  concerned,  therefore,  they  are  but  little  afrected 
by  what  flag  flies  over  their  heads  while  they  are 
exploited.  The  capitalist  class  of  another  country 
is  no  more  the  enemy  of  the  workers  than  the  capi- 
talist class  of  their  own  country— even  if  Germany 
should  impose  its  rule  upon  the  entire  world,  the 
workers  of  the  several  countries  would  merely  be 
exploited  by  the  capitalists  of  Germany  instead 
of  by  their  own  capitalists.  However  strong  a 
hold  national  allegiance  may  still  enjoy  upon  the 
hearts  of  the  people,  modern  industrial,  commer- 
cial and  financial  extension  has  nullified  the  true 
significance  of  national  boundaries.  The  only  war 
which  can  repay  the  untold  life,  wealth,  misery  and 
sacrifice  which  are  spent  on  it  would  be  a  war 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  149 

prosecuted  for  the  purpose  of  distributing  happi- 
ness equitably,  if  not  equally. 

''The  present  war  is  not  such  a  war.  Which- 
ever group  of  belligerents  wins,  and  whichever 
loses,  it  will  be  merely  one  branch  of  the  capitalist 
system  which  wins  and  a  similar  branch  of  the 
capitalist  system  which  loses.  The  only  truly  sig- 
nificant war  is  the  struggle  to  abolish  the  capital- 
ist system,  and  that  struggle  is  only  interrupted, 
if,  indeed,  not  seriously  postponed  and  weakened, 
by  the  present  struggle  between  artificial  issues. 
The  world  issue  of  the  present  and  future  is  social 
and  industrial  democracy,  just  as  the  worJd-issue 
of  the  immediate  past  lias  been  political  democ- 
racy. *  Hence  the  future,  looking  back  upon  any 
war  of  today  which  is  not  waged  for  social  and 
industrial  democracy,  will  regard  it  as  pathetically 
futile,  just  as  the  nineteenth  century  regarded  a 
war  between  two  groups  of  mediaeval  principali- 
ties both  of  whiph  were  groping  in  the  darkness 
of  the  mediaeval  system. 

"It  is  maintained,  however,  that  though  eco- 
nomic democracy  and  social  democracy  are  not  at 
stake  in  this  war,  the  principle  of  political  democ- 
racy is  so  at  stake.  It  is  maintained  that  economic 
democracy  and  social  democracy  are  available  only 
through  political  democracy,  and  that  the  goal  of 
Socialism  will  be  brought  nearer  by  the  victory  of 
political  democracy  in  this  war,  and  will  be  ban- 


150  THE  LAEGEB  SOCIALISM 

ished  to  a  greater  distance  by  the  victory  of  politi- 
cal autocracy. 

"In  reply  to  this  contention,  the  Socialist  Party 
must  insist  that  the  issue  of  political  democracy 
in  the  present  war  is  sadly  obscured.  France, 
Great  Britain  and  Italy,  it  is  true,  have  sloughed 
off  the  antiquated  governmental  absolutism  which 
still  rules  Germany,  Austria-Hungary  and  Tur- 
key; but  even  the  German  system  of  Gov- 
ernment is  not  so  antiquated  in  its  abso- 
lutism as  is  that  of  Japan,  one  of  the  En- 
tente. And  more  and  more  the  Far  East  is 
becoming  the  center  of  the  world-stage.  The 
Balkans  also  are  near  the  center  of  the  world- 
stage  on  which  the  curtain  of  the  present  war  was 
raised ;  and  the  most  democratic  nation  of  the  Bal- 
kans fights  by  the  side  of  the  Central  Powers  while 
the  least  democratic  ranges  with  the  Entente. 
Even  the  German  system  of  government  is  not  so 
autocratic  and  so  inimical  to  progress  as  was  that 
of  Tsarist  Russia;  and  when  Ambassador  von 
Bernstorff  was  dismissed,  and  war  thus  practically 
declared  on  Germany  by  the  United  States,  the 
Tsar  was  still  upon  his  throne.  For  more  than  two 
and  a  half  years,  the  opponents  of  Germany  were 
glad  to  have  Tsarism  as  their  ally.  It  is  thus  only 
an  accident  that  the  success  of  the  United  States 
in  a  war  to  defeat  Kaiserism  will  not  result  also 
in  the  enhancement  of  Tsarism.  A  war  which  be- 
came a  war  of  political  principle  only  several 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  151 

weeks  ago  through  the  chance  of  a  revolutionary 
coup  d'etat  might  readily  again  become  in  a  few 
weeks  a  war  of  no  principle  through  the  accident 
of  a  Tsarist  coup  d'etat. 

' '  The  Socialist  Party  may  be  told,  however,  that 
the  tree  must  be  judged  by  its  fruit;  and  that  the 
capitalist  system  which  is  Germany  is  proved  in- 
finitely more  evil  than  the  French,  British  and 
Italian  capitalist  systems  by  the  German  violation 
of  a  solemn  international  pledge  in  the  invasion  of 
Belgium,  as  well  as  by  the  German  treatment  of 
Belgian  civilians.  The  Socialist  Party  takes  this 
occasion  firmly  to  condemn  the  German  invasion  of 
Belgium  as  infamous,  and  its  treatment  of  Belgian 
civilians  as  a  reversion  to  barbarism.  However, 
the  Socialist  Party  must  justify  its  position  by 
calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  present  world 
war  came  but  a  hair's  breadth  from  erupting  in 
1911,  as  a  result  of  the  '  Second  Moroccan  Affair. ' 
This  Moroccan  crisis  was  brought  to  a  head  partly 
by  the  overbearing  conduct  of  German  diplomacy, 
but  more  largely  by  France 's  wanton  violation  of 
her  solemn  international  pledges  regarding  Mo- 
rocco, as  defined  in  the  international  Algeciras 
Treaty  of  1906  and  later. 

"The  German  treatment  of  Belgian  civilians  the 
Socialist  Party  takes  this  occasion  to  use  as  a  text 
to  illustrate  its  contention  that  the  true  enemy  of 
the  workers  and  of  modern  civilization  is  the  capi- 
talist system.  Numerous  vice  investigations  in 


152  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

the  great  cities  of  the  United  States  itself  have  dis- 
covered that  hundreds  of  working-girls  are  driven 
into  prostitution  in  our  own  country  to  an  extent 
because  of  the  low  wages  they  receive.  In  spite 
of  these  findings,  in  but  few  instances  has  the  coun- 
try, through  its  national,  state,  or  municipal  gov- 
ernments, provided  such  an  easily  available  rem- 
edy as  general  minimum  wage  legislation.  A  coun- 
try which  will  not  pass  laws  to  help  keep  many 
of  its  own  working-women  from  resorting  reluc- 
tantly to  prostitution  cannot  cast  a  stone  at  even 
so  brutal  an  outrage  as  the  German  treatment  of 
Belgian  civilians.  Moreover,  the  cruelties  inflicted 
by  Germans  on  Belgians  have  by  no  means  sur- 
passed those  inflicted  by  the  Belgians  themselves 
on  the  natives  of  the  Congo,  or  by  our  own  white 
citizens  on  our  negro  citizens  in  the  South,  while 
our  local,  state  and  national  Governments  officially 
refuse  to  interfere. 

"In  this  connection,  we  call  attention  to  the  fact 
that  it  was  not  until  the  German  Government  again 
resorted  to  unrestricted  submarine  warfare  that 
the  present  Administration  was  willing  to  lead  this 
country  into  the  War.  Therefore,  the  United 
States  enters  the  War,  not  because  the  war  repre- 
sents a  struggle  of  right  against  wrong  in  which 
the  right  must  triumph,  but  because  this  country's 
rights  as  a  neutral  have  been  violated.  If  war  is 
declared  upon  Germany  by  the  United  States,  the 
war  will  hence  have  as  its  main  purpose  avenge- 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  153 

ment  of  violated  American  honor.  It  thus  falls 
within  the  category  of  the  duel;  and  the  Socialist 
Party  maintains  that  victory  by  means  of  armed 
might  is  no  more  successful  a  method  of  settling 
an  international  quarrel  than  the  rapier  thrust  or 
the  pistol  shot  at  dawn  was  an  adequate  and  justi- 
fiable method  of  settling  a  personal  quarrel.  We 
go  on  record  as  asserting  that  American  rights 
and  honor  have  been  flagrantly  abused  by  the  Ger- 
man Government;  and  that  all  modern  civilized 
standards  of  decency  were  outraged  by  the  sinking 
of  the  Lusitania.  We  go  on  record  as  denouncing 
in  the  strongest  terms  of  which  we  are  capable  the 
violation  of  international  law  by  the  German  Gov- 
ernment. We  go  on  record  as  admitting  that,  ac- 
cording to  the  conceptions  of  the  past  underlying 
the  old  relations  between  nations,  America  has  a 
just  grievance  against  Germany.  But,  as  the 
party  entrusted  with  the  conceptions  of  the  future 
which  will  underlie  the  new  relations  of  all  classes 
of  mankind,  Avn  must  deny  that  an  insult  to  na- 
tional honor  and  to  national  rights  justifies  the 
untold  expenditure  of  life,  suffering  and  wealth, 
demanded  in  the  process  of  avenging  the  insult  by 
means  of  ~w  ar. 

' '  The  Socialist  Party,  however,  is  not  so  blinded 
to  the  character  of  the  belligerents  in  the  present 
War  as  not  to  appreciate  that,  on  the  whole,  Ger- 
many represents  a  somewhat  more  vicious  type 
of  capitalism  than  Great  Britain,  France,  Italy  or 


154  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

the  United  States.  Insisting  that  Prussianism  is 
inherent  in  all  capitalist  nations,  and  that  the 
Huns  are  by  no  means  all  in  Prussia,  we  yet 
realize  that  Prussianism  has  a  stronger  hold  upon 
Germany  than  upon  the  Entente  countries  and  the 
United  States,  and  that  in  those  lands  the  percent- 
age of  Huns  is  somewhat  lower  than  in  Prussia. 
If  our  country  should  unhappily  be  drawn  into 
war  against  Germany,  and  if  that  war  should  nev- 
ertheless unhappily  be  dragged  out  until  one  camp 
is  victorious  and  the  other  is  vanquished,  we  go  on 
record  as  believing  that  the  progress  of  the  world 
will  be  less  seriously  set  back  by  the  victory  of  the 
United  States  and  its  associates  against  Germany. 
"  Nevertheless,  we  are  impelled  to  take  an  anti- 
war position  because  of  our  conviction  that  the 
present  civilization  represented  by  the  United 
States  as  by  all  the  other  Great  Powers  is  inher- 
ently a  vicious,  antiquated  and  backward-looking 
civilization.  As  Socialists,  we  obviously  cannot 
support  a  war  which,  if  successful,  thus  will  result 
merely  in  the  ascendancy  of,  let  us  say,  an  80% 
vicious  type  of  civilization  over  a  90%  vicious 
type.  The  cost  is  too  extravagantly  high  for  the 
slight  value  of  the  achievement.  When  the  present 
war  is  over,  the  struggle  of  Socialism  to  unseat 
Capitalism  will  face  well-nigh  the  same  opposi- 
tion from  a  victorious  Entente  as  from  victorious 
Central  Powers.  For  these  reasons,  as  Socialists 
we  pledge  ourselves  to,  and  concentrate  all  our 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  155 

efforts  on,  preventing  the  entrance  of  the  United 
States  into  the  War.  And  if  unsuccessful,  we 
pledge  ourselves  at  all  times  to  exert  all  legal  ef- 
forts in  behalf  of  an  immediate  peace  through  the 
cessation  of  hostilities. 

"Moreover,  even  to  those  who  believe,  as  we 
cannot,  that  a  difference  of  a  truly  fundamental 
nature  exists  between  the  civilization  of  one  group 
of  belligerents  and  that  of  the  other,  we  solemnly 
point  out  the  degrading  effect  of  war.  War  is  a 
direct  and  devastating  enemy  of  the  beneficent 
features  of  national  life.  It  is  similarly  a  direct 
and  luxurious  encouragement  to  malevolent  forces 
undermining  a  nation's  democracy.  The  nation 
which  wades  through  months  and  years  of  war 
emerges  with  an  aggravated  materialism  and  a 
new  impatience  of  any  considerations  except  those 
of  might  and  force.  War  necessarily  brings  into 
play  dormant  brutal  and  savage  instincts;  and 
largely  inhibits,  even  to  the  point  of  atrophy,  the 
instincts  which  are  the  more  generous  and  enno- 
bling. Whatever  differences  may  have  existed  be- 
tween the  Entente  Allies'  civilization  and  Ger- 
many's civilization  before  the  War,  to  the  dis- 
favor of  Germany,  will  be  practically  wiped  out  by 
the  processes  of  war. 

"Nor  can  the  United  States  hope  to  escape  this 
morally  enervating  effect  of  War,  should  she  enter 
the  lists  against  Germany.  To  whatever  extent 
the  capitalist  system  of  Germany  before  1914  was 


156  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

more  vicious  than  that  of  the  other  great  Powers, 
it  was  so  largely  because  Germany  in  time  of 
peace  was  permeated  by  the  spirit  of  war.  The 
opponents  of  Germany  may  defeat  her  armed 
might  on  the  battle-field;  but  in  the  course  of  the 
process,  the  spirit  of  Germany  will  have  permeated 
them,  and  will  have  removed  most  of  the  points 
differentiating"  them  from  her.  Our  determination 
to  oppose  war  by  the  United  States  against  Ger- 
many thus  functions  for  the  preservation  of  what- 
ever is  wholesome  in  American  civilization,  and 
against  the  malevolent  forces  which  would  lower 
the  plane  of  our  national  life. 

"This  being  the  position  of  the  Socialist  Party 
of  America,  what  course  of  action  can  it  and  must 
it  take  in  support  of  that  position? 

"In  determining  its  course  of  action,  the  Social- 
ist Party  recognizes  that  it  is  but  a  minority 
party.  As  a  minority,  and  as  a  political  party 
pledged  to  abide  by  the  decision  and  will  of  the 
majority,  it  must  accept  the  decision  and  will  of 
the  majority  if  the  majority  determine  upon  war. 
But  with  all  its  power,  the  Socialist  Party  de- 
mands that  action  be  taken  to  determine  the  will 
of  the  majority  by  means  of  an  advisory  referen- 
dum in  which  women  as  well  as  men  shall  vote. 
Only  thus  can  both  the  proponents  and  the  oppo- 
nents of  an  American  declaration  of  war  upon  Ger- 
many know  whether  the  people  of  the  country  are 
(in  favor  of  war.  In  such  a  referendum,  the  Social- 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  157 

1st  Party,  in  conformity  with  its  principles  above 
set  forth,  naturally  will  exert  all  its  power  to 
obtain  a  decision  for  peace. 

"In  case  such  a  referendum  should  return  a  de- 
cision for  war,  the  Socialist  Party  in  its  actions 
must  consider  itself  bound  to  accept  that  decision 
of  the  majority,  no  matter  how  firmly  convinced 
that  such  a  decision  will  redound  to  the  injury  of 
the  country  and  of  the  world.  It  is  in  duty  bound, 
therefore,  not  to  resort  to  active,  violent,  illegal 
or  extra-political  methods  in  order  to  prevent  the 
majority  from  prosecuting  the  war,  or  in  order  to 
effect  peace.  On  the  other  hand,  we  remind  our 
pro-war  opponents  that  if  we  respect  their  rights 
as  a  majority,  they  are  in  duty  bound  to  respect 
our  privileges  as  a  minority.  Even  if  the  country 
decides  upon  war,  we  preserve  our  right  of  free 
speech,  of  free  press,  of  assemblage  and  of  peace- 
ful petition  for  a  reversal  of  the  war  decision.  In 
pursuance  of  this  right  as  a  political  minority, 
and  in  accordance  with  our  position  as  Socialists 
in  opposition  to  this  war  and  to  the  participation 
of  our  country  in  it,  we  pledge  ourselves  to  agitate 
ceaselessly,  through  the  constitutional  methods 
open  to  a  minority  political  party,  for  the  immedi- 
ate advent  of  peace. 

"This  demand  for  an  advisory  referendum  on 
America's  participation  in  the  War  may  be  denied, 
and  America  may  declare  war  by  vote  of  Congress 
without  any  opportunity  for  the  masses  of  the  peo- 


158  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

pie  to  make  their  voice  heard.  In  that  case,  we 
still  are  pledged  as  a  minority  political  party  to 
abide  by  a  decision  adverse  to  us.  By  having 
organized  politically  in  the  past,  we  have  accepted 
the  method  of  government  prevailing  in  this  coun- 
try, no  matter  how  imperfect  it  may  be.  Also,  we 
recognize  that  a  minority  political  party  cannot  ex- 
pect to  enjoy  all  the  freedom  of  dissent  in  time  of 
war  to  which  it  is  entitled  in  time  of  peace.  To  an 
extent,  the  exigencies  of  war  justify  the  curtail- 
ment of  certain  superficial  rights ;  and  of  course, 
military  and  naval  information  of  value  to  the 
enemy  cannot  be  allowed  public  discussion.  But 
the  fundamental  rights  of  dissent  belong  to  a 
minority  even  in  war.  The  existence  of  war  can- 
not provide  any  legitimate  excuse  for  the  majority 
to  break  its  tacit  contract  with  the  minority  which 
is  implied  in  the  practise  of  political  democracy, 
any  more  than  for  the  minority  to  break  its  con- 
tract with  the  majority;  and  the  Socialist  Party 
will  carry  out  faithfully  its  end  of  the  contract  so 
long  as  its  opponents  carry  out  their  end.  There 
must  be  no  suppression  of  Socialist  newspapers 
and  magazines;  no  interference  with  Socialist 
meetings ;  no  ban  upon  Socialist  campaigns  in  elec- 
tions ;  no  imprisonment  of  Socialist  leaders  merely 
for  expressing  anti-war  views.  In  war  as  in  peace, 
the  presence  of  a  militant  opposition  party  is  nec- 
essary to  keep  the  ruling  group  from  error,  and 
from  betrayal  of  the  trust  which  has  been  reposed 


THE  SOCIALISTS  AND  THE  WAR  159 

in  it.  If  the  United  States  should  enter  the  war 
against  Germany,  it  will  be  of  service  rather  than 
of  injury  to  the  country  if  the  Socialist  Party  con- 
tinues its  opposition  to  the  war,  and  thus  compels 
those  responsible  for  the  conduct  of  the  war  to 
wage  it  for  the  high  purposes  which  they  have  pro- 
fessed, and  doubtless  will  continue  to  profess. 

''Thus  opposing  American  participation  in  the 
war,  the  Socialist  Party  nevertheless  lays  one  sol- 
emn injunction  upon  those  who  differ  with  it  and 
who  support  war  participation.  It  is  that  possible 
American  participation  shall  be  used  only  to  pre- 
vent German  success  and  to  ensure  a  peace  without 
victory.  The  Socialist  Party  demands  that  the 
President  of  the  United  States  keep  ever  before 
him  and  before  the  country  his  statements  of  Jan- 
uary, 1917,  that  only  a  peace  without  victory  can 
be  a  stable  peace,  and  that  a  peace  between  victor 
and  vanquished  can  only  sow  the  seeds  of  future 
wars.  If  that  was  true  while  the  United  States 
was  a  neutral,  it  will  be  no  less  true  if  the  United 
States  become  a  belligerent. 

"With  respect  to  conscription  and  war  loans, 
the  Socialist  Party  must  continue  its  attitude  as 
the  anti-war  opposition  party.  We  pledge  our 
utmost  to  resist  the  enactment  of  conscription  leg- 
islation. If  conscription  comes,  we  shall  abide  by 
the  laws,  and  the  attitude  of  each  Socialist  toward 
compulsory  military  service  becomes  then  an  indi- 
vidual matter.  To  every  Socialist,  as  to  any  non- 


160  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

Socialist,  who  feels  called  upon  to  deny  the  right 
of  the  state  to  conscript  the  individual  for  the  busi- 
ness of  killing,  against  the  dictates  of  his  own 
conscience  and  his  own  reason,  we  pledge  our 
heartiest  support;  but  the  Socialist  Party  as  such 
will  not  urge  its  individual  members  either  to  re- 
sist or  to  yield  to  conscription.  Similarly,  we 
demand  that  the  war  be  paid  for  as  it  progresses, 
and  that  surplus  wealth  be  taxed  to  the  vanishing 
point  before  necessities  are  taxed,  and  before  the 
Government  incurs  debt  to  pay  for  the  war  by 
means  of  war  loans.  If  such  loans  are  neverthe- 
less passed,  the  Socialist  Party  can  neither  en- 
dorse nor  oppose  popular  participation  in  them. 

"As  the  political  representative  of  the  class- 
conscious  workers  of  the  United  States,  the  Social- 
ist Party  of  America  once  more  reaffirms  its  alle- 
giance to  the  principles  of  international  Socialism. 
It  still  places  international  before  national  wel- 
fare. It  still  affirms  that  the  true  enemy  of  man- 
kind and  the  true  bar  to  mankind's  progress  is  the 
capitalist  system.  It  renews  its  affiliations,  with 
the  working-class  movements  and  parties  of  other 
countries.  It  takes  its  stand  by  the  side  of  these 
parties  in  all  countries,  Entente,  Central  Powers 
or  neutral,  which  are  opposing  the  continuation  of 
the  war;  and  it  pledges  to  those  parties  its  active 
cooperation  in  effecting  an  immediate  peace." 


CHAPTER  VL 

SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL,  APPEAL. 

IF  the  foregoing  considerations  concerning  the 
weakness  of  Socialism  in  the  United  States  are 
substantially  valid,  the  American  Socialist  move- 
ment will  do  well  to  launch  its  appeal  from  a  new 
basis.  The  old  appeal  based  largely  on  self -inter- 
est has  proved  too  inadequate ;  for,  as  previously 
suggested,  it  may  well  t/3  doubted  if  the  majority 
of  Americans  at  the  present  time  belong  to  the 
proletariat  in  the  Marxian  sense  of  the  term.  Cer- 
tainly, the  doubt  becomes  stronger  as  to  whether 
three-fourths  of  the  people  of  the  United  States 
would  gather  round  the  Socialist  flag  even  if  they 
could  be  induced  to  obey  the  slogan, '  *  Stick  to  your 
own  class,  work  with  it,  vote  for  it."  And  Jby  the 
constitutional  obstacles  to  innovations  in  govern- 
ment in  this  country,  it  is  probable  that  the  Social- 
ist Party  could  not  succeed  in  realizing  its  pro- 
gram through  political  action  unless  it  were  sup- 
ported by  electorates  in  three-fourths  of  the 
states.  This  is  especially  true  because  of  the  fact 
that  in  national  elections  both  the  old  parties  will 
indisputably  coalesce  against  the  Socialist  Party 

161 


162  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

when  it  becomes  powerful,  as  they  have  already 
coalesced  against  it  in  Congressional  and  local 
elections  where  it  has  threatened  their  supremacy ; 
and  will  thus  remove  the  possibility  of  playing  off 
one  old  party  against  the  other,  in  the  method  of 
campaign  employed,  for  instance,  to  effect  pro- 
hibition. 

And  unless  the  farmers  are  brought  into  the  fold, 
success  for  political-action  Socialism  in  the  United 
States  may  again  well  be  despaired  of.  The  num- 
ber of  farmers  in  the  United  States  may  be  stead- 
ily decreasing  in  proportion  to  the  population,  and 
the  number  of  farm  tenants  steadily  increasing, 
but  there  are  few  indications  that  in  the  immediate 
future  the  number  of  farmers  will  fall  below  25% 
of  the  total  number  of  workers.  (About  36%  of 
the  employed  males  in  the  United  States  were 
listed  by  the  1910  census  as  in  agricultural  and 
kindred  pursuits.)  Even  if  the  number  should 
fall  to  20%,  when  it  came  to  rounding  up  the  three- 
fourths  of  the  states  necessary  for  constitutional 
amendments,  the  Socialist  Party  would  probably 
find  that  in  more  than  one-fourth  of  the  states  the 
farmers  would  be  sufficiently  near  50%,  especially 
when  reinforced  by  the  members  of  the  capitalist 
and  middle  classes  and  by  others  outside  of  the 
benefits  to  be  conferred  by  Socialism,  to  put  a 
spoke  in  the  Socialist  wheel. 

It  seems  obvious,  therefore,  that  unless  the  So- 
cialist Party  is  willing  to  remain  a  minority  party 


SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL      163 

of  protest  and  stimulation,  furnishing  to  its  mem- 
bers only  the  emotional  thrill  and  intellectual  sat- 
isfaction of  being  in  open  rebellion  against  the 
established  order  of  things,  and  to  its  opposing 
capitalist  parties  new  ideas  and  a  goad  to  prog- 
ress; or  else  unless  it  is  willing  to  abandon  its 
status  as  an  organization  of  political  action,  it  will 
have  to  enlarge  its  program  so  as  to  provide  for 
the  interests  of  the  agricultural  population,  both 
individual  landowner  and  tenant  farmer.  To  do 
so,  it  will  be  compelled  to  do  more  than  throw  a 
few  sops  to  Agriculture  in  the  way  of  planks  for 
state-owned  grain  elevators  and  state  marketing 
machinery,  as  the  more  recent  programs  of  the 
Socialist  Party  have  done.  Indeed,  the  Socialist 
programs  will  have  to  go  farther  thanveven  give 
extended  attention  to  the  farmers'  needs.  They 
will  have  to  place  the  farmers '  welfare  on  a  plane 
of  at  least  equal  importance  with  the  welfare  of 
Labor,  and  will  have  to  devote  at  least  as  much 
attention  to  solving  the  ills  of  agriculture  as  to 
solving  those  of  industry.  Otherwise,  there  will 
be  no  reason  why  the  farmer  who  becomes  dissatis- 
fied with  the  present  economic  system  should  turn 
to  the  Socialist  Party  instead  of  to  the  Non-Par- 
tisan  League,  for  instance ;  or  why  the  Non-Parti- 
san League  should  join  forces  with  the  Socialist 
Party. 

But  so  long  as  the  Socialist  Party  appeals  for 
membership  and  political  support  solely  or  chiefly 


164  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

on  the  self-interest  appeal,  the  farmers  will  remain 
religiously  aloof.  It  is  true  that  the  1920  Census 
shows  that  the  proportionate  number  of  farms  in 
the  United  States  is  growing  smaller.  The  day 
may  even  arrive  when  the  ownership  of  agricul* 
tural  land  will  become  as  concentrated  as  the 
ownership  of  industries;  when  the  small  farm 
owned  and  worked  by  the  individual  will  become 
so  rare  as  the  small  business  owned  and  worked 
by  the  individual;  when  the  economies  of  large- 
scale  production  will  prove  -applicable  to  agricul- 
ture as  well  as  to  industry ;  when  hence  there  will 
arise  large  agricultural  corporations,  which  will 
produce  the  bulk  of  the  farm  products  of  the  coun- 
try, which  will  be  owned  by  stockholders  scattered 
over  all  parts  of  the  nation,  and  which  will  em- 
ploy thousands  of  men  who  will  own  no  part  of 
the  land  they  work,  receiving  money  instead  of 
produce  as  the  result  of  their  toil.  But,  unless  all 
indications  lie,  that  day  belongs  to  a  period  too 
distant  to  enter  into  the  calculations  of  Socialist 
procedure  in  the  immediate  future.  At  the  pres- 
ent time,  it  is  far  from  tha  farmer's  self-interest 
to  join  a  movement  aiming  generally  at  Govern- 
ment ownership  and  operation,  as  distinct  from 
general  private  ownership  and  operation. 

True,  the  Socialist  Party  may  assure  the  farmer 
that  for  the  present  the  Socialist  program  will  not 
be  applied  to  land  worked  by  its  owner,  so  that  at 
least  it  will  not  be  to  the  farmer's  injury  if  Social- 


SOCIALISM  ASfD  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL .     165 

ism  becomes  dominant.  But  neither  will  the  domi- 
nance of  Socialism  redound  appreciably  to  his  ben- 
efit on  the  present  appeal  to  self-interest.  It  might 
redound  slightly  to  his  benefit  by  cheapening  agri- 
cultural implements,  seed,  fertilizer,  clothing,  agri- 
cultural credit  and  mortgages,  marketing  proc- 
esses. But  to  bring  him  along  on  that  reckoning, 
the  Socialist  Party  would  have  to  launch  its  ap- 
peal from  the  basis  of  the  greater  material  effi- 
ciency of  a  Socialist  system;  and,  as  we  have  seen, 
the  Socialist  Party  seldom  takes  that  tack.  Fur- 
thermore, if  Agriculture  be  corralled  by  proof  of 
greater  material  efficiency,  Labor  will  have  to  be 
similarly  corralled;  obviously,  a  Socialist  move- 
ment cannot  progress  by  holding  self-interest  be- 
fore the  wage-earners  who  support  it  and  greater 
material  efficiency  before  the  farmers  who  sup- 
port it.  In  the  last  analysis,  greater  economic 
efficiency  and  economic  self -interest  may  be  almost 
identical  as  bases  of  appeal;  but  at  present  the 
Socialist  appeal  asserts  self-interest  chiefly 
through  more  efficient  distribution  of  wealth,  in- 
stead of  through  more  efficient  production  of 
wealth.  Even  so,  the  benefit  to  be  derived  by  the 
farmer  from  such  items  as  the  cheapening  of  the 
tools  and  the  fertilizer  he  uses  is  probably  insuffi- 
cient to  overcome  his  natural  and  acquired  iner- 
tia and  hostility  to  Socialism  to  the  point  where 
he  will  support  the  Socialist  program. 
In  suggesting  that  the  Socialist  movement  pre- 


166  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

sent  its  appeal  largely  on  an  ethical  basis,  I  fully 
appreciate  that  in  the  present  year  of  our  Lord 
the  "word  ''ethical"  has  a  most  unfortunate  con- 
notation. It  suggests  the  Epworth  League,  the 
Chautauqua  platform,  the  social  problem  novel 
and  Woodrow  Wilson.  What  I  mean  by  the  ethi- 
cal impulses  on  which  the  Socialist  movement 
ought  chiefly  to  rely  is  the  impulses  in  man  which 
tempt  him  to  work  for  the  common  good,  often 
when  he  himself  will  not  thereby  be  benefited,  and 
occasionally  when  he  himself  may  even  thereby  be 
injured.  That  such  altruistic  impulses  are  pres- 
ent in  man  as  well  as  selfish  impulses,  it  seems 
hard  to  deny.  The  instances  are  too  many,  spring 
too  readily  to  the  mind,  occur  too  frequently  in 
one's  every-day  experiences  as  well  as  in  history, 
are  too  convincing.  True,  they  may  be  and  doubt- 
less should  be  traced  back  to  non-altruistic  factors, 
and  I  am  particularly  fearful  lest  the  use  of  the 
word  "ethical"  should  imply  a  belief  that  the 
"ethical"  impulses  in  man  derive  from  some  su- 
pernatural source.  The  anthropologist  may  give 
us  their  origin  in  the  tribal  instinct  developed  in 
the  prehistoric  days  when  inability  or  failure  to 
place  the  survival  or  success  of  the  tribe  above  the 
individual's  selfish  instincts  proved  fatal  not  only 
to  the  tribe,  but  also  to  the  non-altruistic  individ- 
ual. Or  the  psychologist  may  find  the  origin  of 
the  ethical  impulses  in  the  instinct  for  commenda- 
tion of  one's  fellows,  in  a  sublimation  of  the  sex 


SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL      167 

instinct,  in  development  of  the  paternal  instinct, 
in  a  slight  twitching  of  a  minor  abdominal  muscle, 
or  in  similar  sources.  The  birth  and  nurture  of  the 
ethical  impulse  do  not  concern  us  here.  I  am 
pointing  only  to  the  fact  that  it  exists,  may  be 
appealed  to,  may  be  built  upon. 

The  Marxian  may  deny  that  this  ethical  impulse 
is  ever  strong  enough  to  counterbalance  the  ap- 
peal of  self-interest,  except  in  rare  instances  and 
in  rare  individuals.  But  surely  the  very  existence 
and  procedure  of  the  Socialist  movement  in  the 
United  States  refute  him.  The  Socialist  Party 
of  America  contains  a  large  number  of  members 
who  belong  to  it  and  strive  for  it  solely  because  of 
their  belief  in  its  principles,  and  who  have  nothing 
to  gain  by  their  Socialist  adherence  and  striving. 
Indeed,  it  contains  many  who  have  lost  jobs, 
higher  salaries,  social  prestige,  to  say  nothing  of 
leisure  and  recreation,  because  of  their  Socialist 
activities ;  and  who  held  no  illusion  that  Socialism 
would  arrive  in  time  to  benefit  them,  or  would 
benefit  them  if  it  did  arrive.  The  regular  attend- 
ance upon  drab  and  dreary  Local  and  committee 
meetings,  the  early  rising  on  Sunday  mornings 
and  the  late  retiring  on  week-day  nights  in  order 
to  distribute  literature,  the  persistent  street-cor- 
ner harangues  before  apathetic  or  hostile  audi- 
ences, to  say  nothing  of  ten,  fifteen  and  twenty 
year  jail  sentences,  surely  these  evidences  of  devo- 
tion which  alone  have  held  the  Socialist  Party 


168  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

together  cannot  be  explained  solely  on  the  basis  of 
self-interest.  And  if  the  Marxian  retort  that  these 
instances  are  exceptional,  one  can  point  to  the 
stand  of  the  Socialist  Party  as  a  whole  on  Ameri- 
can participation  in  the  World  War.  It  must  have 
been  apparent  to  the  leaders  and  rank-and-file  of 
the  Socialist  Party  that  the  adoption  of  the  St. 
Louis  Resolution  would  injure  the  organization — 
perhaps  at  the  very  outset  of  American  participa- 
tion giving  it  renewed  strength  from  the  support 
of  pacifists  and  pro-Germans,  but  as  the  war  con- 
tinued, covering  it  with  general  disapprobation 
and  hostility.  Indeed,  probably  only  a  few  of  the 
more  cool-headed  leaders  and  rank-and-file  mem- 
bers -paid  any  heed  to  the  effect  of  the  St.  Louis 
^Resolution  in  advancing  the  self-interest  of  the 
Socialist  Party;  they  voted  for  it  because  of  the 
ethical  impulse  to  have  the  Party  take  the  stand 
on  war  which  it  seemed  to  them  the  Party  was 
ethically  obligated  to  take. 

However,  even  granting  that  the  ethical  impulse 
cannot  generally  be  appealed  to,  in  opposition  to 
self-interest,  to  gain  general  support  for  the  So- 
cialist cause,  surely  the  Marxian  will  grant  that 
the  ethical  appeal  may  succeed  where  it  is  not 
opposed  to  self-interest.  He  will  doubtless  grant 
even  that  in  such  case  its  use  is  justifiable  and  may 
be  wholesome,  or,  at  least,  not  unwholesome.  Now, 
in  the  present  stage  of  development  of  the  Ameri- 
can capitalist  system,  there  are  still  great  num- 


SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL      169 

bers  of  people  whose  self-interest  is  but  little 
bound  up,  for  better  or  for  worse,  in  the  advent 
of  Socialism.  They  are  not  only  members  of  the 
middle-class,  whose  salaries  would  probably  be 
cut  in  about  the  same  proportion  as  their  expenses 
by  the  substitution  of  Socialism  for  capitalism, 
and  whose  mode  of  life  would  accordingly  proba- 
bly be  but  little  changed.  They  are  also,  and 
more  particularly,  as  just  maintained1,  the  farmers. 
The  farmers  are  peculiarly  susceptible  to  the  ethi- 
cal appeal.  Religion  has  a  stronger  hold  upon 
them  than  upon  most  of  the  other  elements  of  the , 
community,  and  they  respond  more  readily  than 
probably  any  ether  element  to  appeals  for  support 
of  a  movement  because  it  is  "right"  and  in  fun: 
therance  of  the  ethical  principles  of  Christianity. 
As  a  matter  of  fact;  there  is  at  the  present  time 
in  the  United  States  an  inchoate  sympathy  with 
socialism — not  with  Socialism.  To  an  extent,  of 
course,  this  sympathy  is  due  to  resentment  at  prof- 
iteering; discomfort  from  the  high  cost  of  living; 
anger  at  the  ruthless  suppression  of  minority  opin- 
ion inflicted  during  and  after  our  participation  in 
the  World  War ;  possibly  stirring  of  the  imagina- 
tion by  the  success  of  Soviet  Eussia  against  the 
capitalistic  nations'  attacks  upon  her;  and,  within 
intellectual  circles,  sad  disillusion  as  to  the  ability 
of  a  mere  liberalism  to  be  effective  in  the  present 
intensity  of  post-war  hysteria  and  economic  class 
warfare.  But  that  sympathy  is  due  also  to  a  vague' 


170  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

realization  that  the  motif  of  the  capitalist  system 
contradicts  the  ethical  principles  that  we  avow, 
whether  in  churches,  in  silent  communion  of 
prayer,  in  literature  or  elsewhere.  This  sympathy 
is  evidenced  by  an  increasing  number  of  admis- 
sions that  "Oh,  yes,  there  are  many  good  points 
about  Socialism";  "I'm  a  Socialist  in  lots  of 
things";  "I  suppose  Socialism  is  bound  to  come." 
Of  course,  this  frame  of  mind  is  largely  unor- 
ganized and  unconscious  of  the  true  import  of  So- 
cialism. What  it  purports,  rather,  is  an  increas- 
ing longing  for  a  system  of  human  relations  that 
will  be  more  kindly  and  generally  "different," 
without  any  very  definite  program  for  the  consum- 
mation of  this  ethical  impulse.  But  the  significant 
point,  it  seems  to  me,  is  that  when  persons  of  this 
frame  of  mind  come  into  actual  contact  with  the 
Socialist  movement,  many  are  apt  to  be  repelled, 
rather  than  attracted.  The  compleat  Marxian,  of 
course,  would  explain  this  repulsion  by  self-inter- 
est :  the  vague  sympathizer  with  Socialism  as  hold- 
ing forth  a  promise  of  a  more  Christian  civiliza- 
tion loses  his  sympathy  when  he  realizes  that 
Socialism  will  endanger  the  fatness  of  his  purse. 
But  many  who  are  thus  repelled  are  those  whose 
pocketbooks  will  be  fattened,  or  at  least  unaf- 
fected, by  the  advent  of  Socialism.  Or  else  they 
are,  in  some  cases,  of  those  who  in  the  past  have 
proved  superior  to  the  self-interest  consideration 
by  supporting  other  movements  which  have  threat- 


SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL      171 

ened  their  purses,  or  which  occasionally,  becoming 
successful,  have  carried  the  threat  to  fulfillment. 
And  when  such  persons  get  on  the  inside  of  the 
Socialist  movement,  they  cannot  but  feel  stifled  at 
the  intolerance  and  suppression  inherent  in  its 
machinery.  Socialist  Party  members  who,  even  at 
the  dictates  of  their  consciences  and  in  almost  un- 
paralleled crises,  should  vote  for  a  candidate  other 
than  the  regular  Party  candidate,  are  automati- 
cally subject  to  expulsion.  The  rule  is  as  inflexi- 
ble when  the  vote  was  cast  for  a  President  in  the 
hope  that  he  would  keep  the  country  out  of  war  as 
if  the  vote  were  to  be  cast  for  a  physician  of  rare 
administrative  ability  as  health  commissioner  of 
a  large  city,  rather  than  for  the  Socialist  candi- 
date who  might  or  might  not  be  able  to  handle  the 
municipal  health  problems  in  the  face  of  an  im- 
pending plague  or  epidemic.  There  are  other  sim- 
ilar rules  the  infraction  of  which  also  renders  the 
Comrade  automatically  subject  to  expulsion.  The 
Socialist  Party,  bitterly  complaining  when,  as  a 
sincere  minority  party  in  the  United  States,  it  is 
treated  with  intolerance,  displays  much  intoler- 
ance toward  any  minority  opinion  which  might 
sincerely  arise  within  its  own  ranks. 

Moreover,  such  potential  sympathizers  with  So- 
cialism are  particularly  repelled,  in  many  cases, 
by  the  flatly  sordid  demand  which  underlies  much 
of  the  current  Socialist  propaganda  in  the  United 
States : — ' '  The  workman  must  receive  the  full  re- 


172  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

turn  of  his  labor. ' '  They  thus  discover  that,  in  the 
words  they  themselves  would  probably  use, 
"These  Socialists  are  afraid  that  they  aren't  get- 
ting all  that's  coming  to  them."  They  can  under- 
stand, of  course,  this  point  of  view — it  is  the  point 
of  view  of  most  other  organized  groups  in  the  com- 
munity, and  it  may  be  justified.  But  many  who 
have  been  vaguely  stirred  by  the  promise  of  a 
"better"  type  of  civilization  turn  away  feeling 
that,  after  all,  "The  Socialists  are  just  like  the 
rest  of  them."  In  the  battle-cry,  "The  worker 
must  receive  all  he  produces,"  there  is  little  to 
capture  the  imagination  of  those  who,  like  the 
farmers,  have  little  direct  interest  in  such  a  slogan, 
but  who  are  responsive  to  ethical  issues.  At  all 
events,  I  believe  most  Socialists  themselves  would 
agree  that  the  sympathy  with  socialism  with  a 
small  "  s "  in  the  United  States  is  greater  than 
the  sympathy  with  or  support  of  Socialism  with 
capital  "S,"  and  that  that  state  of  affairs  can  be 
only  partially  explained  by  the  effect  of  an ti -"So- 
cialist propaganda. 

After  all,'  the  evils  which  Socialism  attacks  are 
largely  the  evils  against  which  the  ethical  prin- 
ciples of  Christianity  are  arrayed,  and  the  bene- 
fits which  Socialism  would  bestow  are  largely  the 
benefits  which  would  accrue  by  adherence  to  the 
ethical  principles  to  which  Christendom  pays  at 
least  nominal  homage.  This  statement  natu- 
rally does  not  imply  any  belief  that  Jesus  was 


SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL      173 

a  Socialist  more  than  eighteen  hundred  years 
before  Marx,  or  that  Jesus 's  system  can  in 
ariy  sense  be  described  as  Socialism.  Still  less 
does,  it  imply,  in  making  use  of  ethics  on  which 
Christian  civilization  is  founded,  or  on  which  a 
Christian  civilization  would  be  founded,  a  willing- 
ness to  accept,  or  even  to  connive  at,  the  theology 
which  has  grown  up  around  those  ethics.  This  is, 
rather,  simply  another  way  of  saying  that  when 
Socialism  abandons  its  "  inevitability "  line  of  ap- 
proach in  favor  of  an  "ought"  line  of  approach, 
the  "ought"  becomes  meaningless  unless  the 
ethics  of  Christianity  are  accepted.  It  is  on  these 
ethics  that  the  Socialist  must  base  his  "ought"; 
if  those  ethics  are  rejected,  the  anti-Socialist 
merely  retorts  "  *  Ought?'  Why  'ought!'  "  and  is 
unanswerable. 

Why,  then,  should  not  the  Socialist  movement 
present  its  appeal  largely  on  the  ground  that  the 
present  capitalist  system  of  Christendom  is  a 
frank  and  flagrant  denial  of  the  ethical  principles 
which  Christendom  prof  esses ;  and  that  a  Socialist 
system,  on  the  whole,  represents  the  -crystalliza- 
tion of  those  principles,  as  tampered  by  the  twen- 
tieth century's  need  for  organization  and  integra- 
tion which  must  render  impracticable  much  of  the 
individualist  communism  and  anarchism  which 
Jesus  taught!  These  ethical  principles  are  in 
existence ;  are  accepted  theoretically  by  most  per- 
sons ;  are  mighty  in  their  power ;  and  clamor  to  be 


174  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

used  in  political  and  economic  campaigns  and 
struggles.  Of  course,  it  is  easy  to  wax  clever  at 
the  expense  of  the  Christian  ethical  system — not 
merely  in  its  present  application,  or  lack  of  appli- 
cation; but  also,  if  strictly  applied,  in  its  inade- 
quacy and  vagueness  in  meeting  the  complex  prob- 
lems of  modern  life.  And  yet,  away  from  the  in- 
tellectual circles,  there  would  probably  be  nothing 
to  replace  the  Christian  principles,  or  at  least 
nothing  so  wholesome,  if  they  should  be  aban- 
doned. For  most  people,  after  all,  nothing  else 
preaches  so  adequately  the  need  for  the  elemen- 
tary virtues,  and  it  would  be  a  serious  calamity  if 
those  principles  should  still  further  atrophy 
through  disuse. 

It  may  be  objected  that  it  is  exaggeration  to 
maintain  that  the  Socialist  movement  in  the 
United  States  is  not  based  upon  ethical  considera- 
tions and  ignores  ethical  values  in  presenting  its 
case.  True,  there  is  naturally  a  proportion  of 
Socialist  propaganda  which  may  be  called  ethical, 
just  as  there  is  a  proportion  of  the  Socialist  Party 
membership  which  visualizes  Socialism  funda- 
mentally as  the  fulfillment  of  the  commonly- 
accepted  moral  code.  And  yet,  on  the  whole, 
a  Socialist  who  would  like  to  see  American  Social- 
ism lay  more  stress  upon  the  ethical,  appeal  is 
apt  to  find  in  the  Socialist  movement  too  much 
reliance  upon  the  idea  of  physical  force.  He  is 
apt  to  feel  that  the  working-class  is  urged  to  hurl 


SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL      175 

the  capitalist  class  from  the  seat  of  power,  and 
jump  into  the  saddle  itself,  too  little  because  it 
ought  to  be  in  the  saddle;  and  too  much  because, 
if  it  so  wills,  it  has  the  might  to  sit  there.  He 
would  find  this  point  of  view  too  often,  for  in- 
stance, in  Socialist  reaction  to  current  industrial 
struggles.  He  would  find  too  many  Socialists  who 
will  support  every  strike,  whether  justified  or  un- 
justified— indeed,  too  many  who  are  prone  to  deny 
that  the  workers  can  ever  be  unjustified  in 
striking. 

Now,  all  strikes  can  be  supported  as  part  of  the 
general  struggle  between  the  capitalist  class  and 
the  proletariat,  in  which  the  proletariat  on  the 
whole  has  the  better  case  and  should  win,  and  in 
which  general  support  of  the  proletariat  therefore 
involves  support  of  all  its  skirmishes.  Just  so,  a 
pro-Entente  sympathizer  during  the  World  War 
might  have  stuck  to  his  side  despite  the  violation 
of  the  neutrality  of  Greece  and  the  theft  of  German 
private  property  in  the  United  States.  But  such 
a  pro-Entente  sympathizer  must  still  have  charac- 
terized the  violation  of  Grecian  neutrality  and  the 
German  private  property  .  robbery  as  ethically 
wrong,  regretting  that  they  had  to  be  supported  if 
the  entire  Entente  cause  was  to  be  supported. 
Whereas  your  American  Socialist  too  often  sup- 
ports even  strikes  in  direct  violation  of  contracts, 
not  regretfully,  not  because  only  thus  can  he  sup- 
port the  general  class  struggle,  but  joyously,  be- 


176  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

cause  in  his  eyes  almost  any  means  to  raise  the 
proletariat  and  lower  the  bourgeoisie  is  justified.. 
Again,  it  is  naturally  possible  to  defend 
strikes  in  violation  of  contracts  on  the  ground  that 
such  contracts,  if  inelastic,  if  manipulated  by  union 
officials  against  the  will  of  the  rank  and  file,  if 
covering  too  long  a  period  of  time,  are  in  them- 
selves unethical  and  unjustified.  But,  again,  that 
is  seldom  the  Socialist  position  in  the  case  of 
strikes  involving  a  breach  of  contract  on  the  part 
of  the  workers  any  more  than  in  those  involving  a 
breach  of  contract  on  the  part  of  the  employers.  I 
have  seen  a  copy  of  what  might  be  called  the  most 
representative  Socialist  publication  in  the  United 
States  appearing  in  large  type  under  this  motto : 
— "The  Working-Class  Is  Always  Right."  Sure- 
ly, that  sentiment  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  the 
journal  in^  question  frequently  distorts  news  of 
strikes  to  favor  the  workers  almost  as  violently 
as  capitalist  newspapers  distort  it  to  favor  the 
employers.  If  50,000  workers  go  out  on  strike 
in  New  York  City,  one  can  generally  be  as  sure 
that  the  Call  will  announce  that  100,000  have 
struck  as  that  the  Times  will  announce  that  25,000 
have  struck.  If  the  strikers  are  losing  their 
struggle,  the  Socialist  press  can  usually  be  relied 
upon  to  conceal  the  fact  at  least  as  faithfully  as 
the  capitalist  press  can  be  relied  upon  to  conceal  a 
strikers'  victory.  It  is  too  much  the  unethical 
creed  that  against  the  foe  all  means  are  justified, 


SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL      177 

the  creed  which  dictated  the  German  invasion  of 
Belgium,  the  Allied  conduct  of  the  War,  once  it 
was  begun,  and  the  terms  of  peace  which  tried  to 
crystallize  the  victory  when  it  had  been  achieved. 
And  if  the  Socialist  movement  pursues  its  struggle 
against  the  capitalist  system  thoroughly  under 
the  sway  of  such  a  creed,  the  organization  of  the 
victory  will  be  along  lines  similar  to  those  of  the 
Treaty  of  Versailles,  as  unstable,  and  as  surely 
calculated  to  make  the  effort  and  the  victory  not 
only  useless,  but  even  worse  than  useless. 

Of  course,  there  are  many  Socialists  who  believe 
that  the  ethical  principles  which  claim  mankind's 
theoretical  allegiance  are  not  wholesome,  and  that 
the  use  of  them  is  hence  not  wholesome.  A*nd  yet 
this  very  type  of  Socialist  is  apt  to  make  use  of 
these  ethical  principles,  and  thus  also  to  render 
theoretical  allegiance  to  them.  He  is  a  rare  So- 
cialist, indeed,  who  does  not  arraign  the  capitalist 
class  and  the  capitalist  leaders  for  Disregarding 
ethics  by  imprisoning  prominent  Socialists,  by  dis- 
organizing Socialist  meetings,  by  expelling  Social- 
ist representatives  and  assemblymen  elected  to 
office,  by  suppressing  Socialist  newspapers,  by 
•keeping  I.  W.  W.  in  jail  without  bail  and  almost 
without  charges,  by  poisoning  the  sources  of  public 
opinion  and  by  utilizing  thugs  and  religious  preju- 
dices to  break  strikes.  Certainly,  it  will  be  difficult 
to  find  a  Socialist  palliation  of  these  unethical  acts 
of  the  capitalist  class  on  the  ground  that  these  acts 


178  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

are  but  in  conformity  with  the  principle  of  self- 
interest.  Under  these  circumstances,  it  would 
seem  as  though  the  Socialists  might  be  willing  to 
leave  the  question  of  the  value  of  the  ethical  prin- 
ciples open,  as  more  than  twenty-five  hundred 
years  of  fervent  discussion  have  left  it  open;  and 
to  use  them  to  further  the  cause,  if  they  will  fur- 
ther it.  And  finally,  even  the  Socialist  who  is  an 
out-and-out  materialist  can  hardly  object  to  using 
ethical  principles,  even  those  in  which  he  disbe- 
lieves, to  attain  his  ends,  for  he  naturally  will  not 
object  to  the  principle  and  practise  of  "The  ends 
justify  the  means." 

(In  passing,  it  may  be  noted  that  if  the  Socialist 
movement  should  succeed  in  identifying  itself  in 
the  minds  of  the  electorate  with  the  electorate's 
present  current  and  accepted  ethics,  and  if  the 
electorate  should  nevertheless  still  reject  Social- 
ism, the  result  would  be  to  end  much  of  the  peo- 
ple's theoretical  allegiance  to  principles  which 
they  either  cannot  or  will  not  live  up  to — and  there 
are  few  consummations  more  devoutly  to  be  de- 
sired than  that.) 

For  example,  consider  the  Socialist  appeal 
based  on  the  class  struggle.  The^class  struggle  is 
probably  the  least  vulnerable  of  the  doctrines  in- 
voked by  Marx.  Acceptance  of  it  must  be  quali- 
fied less  seriously  than  even  acceptance  of  the 
economic' interpretation  of  history.  Many  of  the 
keenest  students  of  modern  social  and  political 


SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL      179 

movements  who  have  felt  themselves  unable  to 
accept  either  Marxian  Socialism  or  Eevisionist 
Socialism  are  willing  to  accept  most  of  the  doc- 
trine of  the  class  struggle.  The  Socialist  program 
calls  theoretically  not  only  for  a  recognition  of  the 
class  struggle,  but  also  for  its  abolition  by  what 
Socialism  conceives  to  be  the  only  possible  method. 
Socialism  maintains  that  the  abolition  of  the  class 
struggle  can  come  only  through  the  abolition  of 
the  present  class  division  by  the  incorporation 
of  all  members  of  society  into  one  class,  the  class 
of  the  .workers.  (Under  Socialism,  of  course,  the 
owning  class  would  be.  replaced  in  this  process  by 
the  Government,  synonymous  with  all  the  people, 
that  is,  with  the  workers ;  or  else,  under  the  latter- 
day  influence  of  the  syndicalist  and  guild  socialist 
urge,  by  individual  groups  of  the  workers,  who 
thus  become  both  workers  in  and  owners  of  the 
establishments  to  which  their  labor  is  devoted.) 

Now,  the  public  mind  in  the  United  States  at  the 
present  time  is  seriously  perturbed  at  manifesta- 
tions of  the  class  struggle  which  have  forged. to 
the  fore,  especially  since  November  11, 1918.  The 
American  public  is  more  than  discommoded  at  the 
incidence  of  strikes.  It  is  developing  anxiety  con- 
cerning the  danger  that  the  entire  fabric  of  Ameri- 
can political  institutions  may  be  rent  in  twain  by 
the  intensity  of  the  economic  conflict;  and  itis  sin- 
cerely eager  to  find  a  method  of  ending  the  class 
struggle. '  If  the  Socialist  appeal  would  stress  ade- 


180  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

quately  the  value  of  the  Socialist  system,  and  the 
futility  of  any  other  prescription,  in  abolishing 
the  economic  class  struggle  by  abolishing  the  eco- 
nomic class-division,  the  American  public  would 
react  much  more"  favorably  than  it  does  now  to  the 
Socialist  appeal.  Naturally,  this  statement  does 
not  imply  thqt  the  appeal  to  terminate  the  class 
struggle  by  abolishing  the  owner  class  would  find 
ready  listeners  among  all  or  most  of  that  class ; 
but  it  does  imply  that  it  would  find  ready  listen- 
ers among  most  of  those  whose  status  is  not  over- 
whelmingly owner  status,  and  even  among  a  con- 
sio^rable  number  of  those,  including  the  farmers, 
whose  status  is  the  owner  status. 

But  in  the  face  of  this  feeling  in  the  United 
States,  ready  to  be  exploited  and  holding  out  rich 
promise  to  those  who  will  exploit  it,  the  Socialist 
Party  of  America  concentrates  too  much  of  its 
fire  on  the  evil  and  too  little  on  the  cure.  There 
is  much  preaching  of  class  consciousness  in  order 
to  end  the  class  struggle,  but  there  is  also  too 
much  preaching  of  the  class  struggle  qua  class 
struggle  anol  too  much  recognition  of  class  con- 
sciousness qua  class  consciousness.  True,  in  the 
books  and  more  formal  Socialist  documents  and 
addresses  the  blessings  of  ending  the  class  strug- 
gle are  stressed ;  but  to  one  who  believes  that  the 
American  Socialist  movement  has  much  to  gain 
by  emphasizing  the  ethical  import  of  Socialism, 
it  must  appear  that  much  of  the  Socialist  propa- 


SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL      181 

ganda  which  actually  penetrates  the  American 
consciousness  rejoices  in,  rather  than  deplores, 
the  class  war. 

The  charge  that  Socialism  preaches  class  hatred 
is  based  on  a  fallacy  so  transparent  that  by  ^his 
time  it  must  arise  from  sheer  misrepresentation 
rather  than  from  mere  ignorance.  It  is  the  present 
alignment  of  society  largely  into  the  group  of  the 
owners  and  the  group  of  the  workers  which  gives 
rise  to  the  class  struggle  and  hence  causes  class 
hatred.  But,  nevertheless,  the  Socialist  movement  , 
in  this  country  has  provided  too  much  excuse  for 
observers  of  it  to  conclude  that  it  assails  the  capi- 
talist class,  not  merely  in  order  to  render  the 
capitalist  class  powerless  to  thwart  the  fruition  of  - 
the  Cooperative  Commonwealth,  but  also  through' 
sheer  hatred  of  it;  not  merely  in  order  to  soften 
the  world's  old  misery,  but  al^o  to  give  the  capital-  ' 
ist  class  a  taste  of  misery  new  to  it.  •  Those  seek- 
ing surcease  from  the  spirit  of  hatred  dominating 
the  world  today  turn  naturally  to  the  Socialist 
movement,  and  they  will  be  repelled  by  evidence, 
that  it,  too,  lies  in  the  grip  of  war-psychology. 
For  it  is  more  than  a  question  of  tactics — it  is  a 
question  of  a  frame  of  mind.  Such  a  war-psychol- 
ogy inevitably  develops  the  frame  of  mind  of  those 
who  professed  that  the  United  States  must  defeat 
Germany  in  order  that  a  better  world-system 
might  replace  the  Balance  of  Power;  but  who  in 
reality  rather  were  actuated  by  the  longing  to 


182  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

' '  lick  the  Huns  good  and  proper. ' '  And  a  Social- 
ist may  be  pardoned  for  fearing  that  this  frame  of 
mind  in  waging  a  class  struggle  would  render  the 
results  of  the  victory  as  barren  and  dangerous  as 
it  rendered  the  results  of  the  victory  in  the  strug-- 
gle  between  the  capitalist  nations. 

This  failure  of  the  Socialist  movement  to  stress 
the  virtues  of  Socialism  in  abolishing  the  present 
class  division  has  become  all  the  more  serious  since 
August  1,  1914.  For,  as  the  pacifists  predicted, 
the  processes  of  War  have  intensified  nationalism 
so  extravagantly  as  to  render  more  difficult  than 
ever  any  organization  of  the  world  on  the  basis  of 
an  internationalism  to  which  nationalism  will  be 
and  must  be  subordinate.  But,  as  many  of  the 
pacifists  did  not  understand,  the  feeling  for  nation- 
alism is  more  than  an  artificially-created  allegi- 
ance inculcated  by  non-Christian  and  militaristic 
education.  It  is  a  mighty  manifestation  of  man's 
clannish  craving,  of  loyalty  to  his  group  as  against 
other  groups;  and  doubtless  it  is  the  inevitable 
heritage  of  man 's  long  history  in  tribal  groups  as 
he  groped  toward  development  somewhat  higher 
than  that  of  his  fellow-animals.  It  has  become 
well-nigh  an  emotional  necessity,  this  patriotism; 
and  hence  it  cannot  be  nullified  by  a  mere  intellec- 
tual demonstration  of  either  its  futility  or  its 
viciousness.  Or,  at  least,  it  can  be  so  nullified  only 
in  the  case  of  those  who  have  severely  trained  their 
emotions  to  be  subordinate  to  their  intellects; 


SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL      183 

and  at  the  present  development  of  the  race,  such 
persons  are  an  impotent  handful,  if,  indeed,  they 
will  ever  cease  being  in  the  decided  minority. 

If  the  evils  of  nationalism  as  opposed  to  inter- 
nationalism and  of  loyalty  to  the  group  as  opposed 
to  loyalty  to  the  whole  are  ever  to  be  controlled, 
it  will  have  to  be  by  opposing  to  them  a  system 
based  also  on  man's  craving  for  clannishness. 
And,  this  the  Socialist- preachment  of  the  interna- 
tional class  struggle  could  do.  By  lining  up  the 
working-class  of  all  countries  against  the  common 
enemy,  the  capitalist  system  (or,  if  necessary,  the 
capitalist  class),  it  furnishes  as  a  substitute  for 
nationalism  an  internationalism  which  makes  the 
same  appeal  to  man 's  clannish  instinct  as  nation- 
alism makes.  Of  course,  the  corraling  of  the 
world's  working-class  into  one  group  for  the  pur- 
poses of  action,  together  with  those  not  primarily 
of  the  working-class  who  are  attracted  by  the 
ethical  appeal  of  such  a  program,  will  probably 
prove  far  more  difficult  than  it  has  proved  in  the 
past  to  corral  all  economic  classes  into  effective 
geographical  national  groups.  Differences  such 
as  those  of  language  and  religion  are  serious  ob- 
stacles to  such  an  effective  internationalism.  Fur- 
thermore, however  weak  the  feeling  for  na- 
tionalism may  have  been  at  the  beginning  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  it  works  most  potently  upon 
mankind  in  this  third  decade  of  the  twentieth  cen- 
tury. It  has  become  surrounded  with  a  halo  of 


184  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

tradition  and  authority  which  has  given  it  an 
ethical,  or  even  religious,  hold  upon  men.  For 
that  reason,  it  can  be  supplanted  by  an  interna- 
tional alignment  along  class  lines  only  if  that 
alignment  is  preached,  not  primarily  as  a  scien- 
tific or  a  determinist  development,  but  primarily 
as  an  emotional  summons  to  an  ethical,  or  even  to 
a  religious,  crusade. 

And  even  if  the  international  class  struggle 
should  be  sincerely  waged  as  an  ethical  crusade, 
its  results,  if  successful  in  achieving  the  purpose 
for  which  it  was  waged,  also  will  have  to  be  sur- 
^ounded  with  an  ethical,  even  a  religious  authority. 
Man  is  a  worshipping  animal.  To  assure  preser- 
vation of  the  wholesome  institutions  which  he  has 
achieved,  he  must  be  allowed  or  induced  to  con- 
ceive them  as  worthy  of  veneration.  Of  course, 
in  the  face  of  a  crisis  like  war,  even  the  worship 
will  not  save  the  institution,  any  more  than  it 
saved  freedom  of  speech  and  press  in  the  United 
States  during  the  war  against  Germany ;  but  when 
the  crisis  is  over,  the  worship  paid  the  institution 
will  help  to  restore  it,  as  our  holding  of  freedom 
of  speech  and  press  as  a  fetish  in  the  pre-war  days 
has  been  largely  responsible  for  the  opposition 
against  continuing  the  more  drastic  sections  of  the 
Espionage  Act  after  the  war. 

Naturally,  there  is  a  grave  danger  in  thus  sur- 
rounding an  institution  or  a  movement  with  a 
pseudo-religious  authority.  The  danger  is  that 


SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL      185 

ihe  institution  or  movement  is  rendered  imper- 
vious to  change,  and  becomes  an  Old  Man  of  the 
Sea  on  the  back  of  progress,  as  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States  has  become.  Therefore,  along 
with  this  raising  of  the  institution  or  movement 
to  a  pedestal  must  proceed  the  leadership  that 
will  stimulate  a  people  or  the  international  group- 
ing of  all  peoples  to  empirical  criticism  and  ex- 
periment. This  balancing  between  the  two  ten- 
dencies, inevitably,  will  be  no  easy  matter;  but 
whether  under  internationalism  or  under  national- 
ism, the  truly  wise  statesmanship  of  the  future, 
as  of  the  past,  will  strengthen  the  veneration  in 
which  the  wholesome  heritage  from  the  past  is 
held,  at  the  same  time  that  it  undermines  the 
veneration  in  which  the  unwholesome  heritage  is 
held. 

Also,  even  if  the  attempt  at  an  international 
working-class  alignment  should  be  successful,  it 
cannot  expect  to  eliminate  minor  groupings  and 
affiliations.  The  instincts  of  the  herd  which  had 
previously  resulted  in  particularist  nationalism 
will  not  be  satisfied  with  the  umversalism  of  even 
an  effective  internationalism.  TJie  nations  will 
persist,  if  in  emasculated  power.  The  repression 
of  man's  clannish  instinct  thwarted  by  their  emas- 
culation will  then  probably  result,  in  part,  in  an 
intensification  of  the  present  allegiances  not  af- 
fected by  the  advent  of  international  Socialism 
in  Europe  and  the  Americas.  Such  will  be  the 


186  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

religious  and  the  fraternal  allegiances.  But  with 
national  boundaries  made  fainter,  this  thwarting 
of  the  clannish  instinct  should  result  also  in  benef- 
icent new  and  mightier  groupings  and  affiliations 
along  natural  instead  of  artificial  lines,  such  as 
kinship  of  profession  and  similarity  of  intellec- 
tual interests. 

This  launching  of  the  Socialist  appeal  prima- 
rily from  an  ethical  basis,  then,  should  help  to 
obviate  the  danger  that  the  advent  of  Socialism 
will  provide  merely  an  increase  in  material  wel- 
fare, and  stop  there.  Let  the  idealistic  spirit  of 
the  pre-Marxian  Socialism  be  revived,  to  be 
guided  and  rendered  definite  and  practicable  by 
the  Marxian  and  post-Marxian  study  of  organiza- 
tion. Let  the  Socialist  movement  identify  its  pro- 
gram, if  only  loosely,  with  the  concrete  exempli- 
fication of  what  may  be  called  the  Christian  ethics 
and  principles  and  ideals,  putting  them  to  the 
pragmatic  test.  Let  the  Socialist  movement  thus 
appeal  primarily  to  the  deep-lying  right-and- 
wrong  sentiment  of  the  nation,  not  as  propaganda 
and  not  in  mere  lip-homage,  but  as  the  guide  to 
be  meticulously  followed  in  the  organization  of 
the  Socialist  state.  There  will  be  little  danger 
that  such  an  ethical  enthusiasm  appealed  to  in- 
telligently, and  in  a  spirit  of  tolerance,  will  be 
satisfied  with  the  mere  achievement  of  decent 
material  comfort  for  all  in  the  community,  and 


SOCIALISM  AND  THE  ETHICAL  APPEAL      187 

will  not  proceed  to  project  itself,  with  material 
well-being  as  the  necessary  foundation,  into  well- 
nigh  every  field  of  human  endeavor  and  every 
creation  of  the  human  spirit. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  CONCERNING  SOCIALIST  POLICY. 

THE  Socialist  movement  in  the  United  States 
has  been  ineffective  in  its  appeal,  not  only  because 
of  the  background  from  which  that  appeal  has  pro- 
ceeded, but  also  because  of  its  technique  of  cam- 
paign. Even  if  in  the  past  the  Socialist  Party,  had 
been  able  to  free  itself  from  the  deductive  Marxian 
mold  of  thought  and  had  launched  its  appeal 
largely  from  an  ethical  basis,  in  all  probability  it 
still  would  have  been  impotent  because  of  faulty 
presentation  of  its  case.  And  even  if  its  case  had 
been  ably  presented,  and  the  Party  ridden  tri- 
umphantly to  power,  in  all  probability  it  would 
have  been  soon  unseated  had  it  not  opened  its  eyes 
to  certain  features  of  its  problem  to  which  at 
the  present  time  it  seems  to  be  blind.  Without  in 
any  way  attempting  to  formulate  a  detailed  and 
final  mode  of  procedure  for  the  American  Socialist 
movement,  it  may  be  of  service  to  indicate  cer- 
tain pitfalls  in  its  path  which  must  be  carefully 
avoided  even  when  the  path  has  been  finally  dis- 
covered and  fairly  entered  upon. 

In  the  first  place,  the  Socialist  Party  of  America 

138 


SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  189 

seems  to  labor  under  appalling  ignorance  as  to 
the^  nature  of  _most  Americans.  .  Tho  reasons  are 
obvious.  The  Party  membership  is  recruited 
largely  from  the  foreign-born.  It  has  been  almost 
entirely  industrial,  and  it  does  not  understand 
the  problems  and  the  concepts  of  the  great  mass 
of  Americans,  even  in  the  cities,  who  are  not  in- 
dustrial workers.  It  also  is  predominantly  urban, 
.and  does  not  appreciate  the  nature  of  the  life  and 
the  people  in  the  agricultural  districts  and  in  the 
small  towns.  The  addresses  and  the  literature 
which  arouse  "enthusiasm  in  a  New  York  East  Side 
or  in  a  Pater  son  or  in  a  Milwaukee  audience  are 
apt  to  arouse  only  hostility  in  a  Brooklyn  or  a 
Montclair  or  a  Louisville  or  an  Adams  County, 
Ohio,  audience.  And  when  it  comes  to  a  show  of 
hands  at  the  polling-booths  for  or  against  Social- 
ism, the  country  will  go  as  go  Brooklyn  and  Mont- 
clair and  Louisville  and  Adams  County. 

Consider,  for  example,  the  prohibition  agitation 
and  the  prevailing  Socialist  explanation  of  it. 
Here  was  a  movement  which  in  less  than  a  genera- 
tion swept  across  the  country  with  irresistible 
force,  which  is  now  seen  to  have  evidenced  a  senti- 
ment well-nigh  as  unanimous  as  any  sentiment 
which  has  left  its  mark  upon  the  United  States 
without  artificial  stimulation,  and  which  placed 
upon  the  statute  books  in  some  respects  the  most 
radical  and  far-reaching  single  piece  of  legislation 
ever  enacted  in  this  country.  Yet  even  when  the 


190  THE  LAEGER  SOCIALISM 

prohibition  movement  was  on  the  brink  of  its  final 
triumph,  the  Socialists,  as  a  rule,  were  so  unap- 
preciative  of  the  dominant  American  opinion  on 
the  drink  problem  as  to  ascribe  Prohibition  to  a 
plot  of  the  capitalists  to  lower  wages,  or  to  what- 
ever other  capitalistic  plot  happened  to  fit  in  with 
Marxian  ideology.  The  leaders  of  the  Republican 
and  Democratic  Parties,  national  or  local,  were  by 
no  means  so  undiscerning ! 

For  another  and  perhaps  more  illuminating  ex- 
ample, consider  the  conventional  Socialist  attitude 
toward  the  phenomenon  known  as  Billy  Sunday. 
The  current  and  well-nigh  unanimous  Socialist 
diagnosis  of  Sunday  was  that  he  was  the  tool  of 
the  capitalist  class  in  allaying  discontent  among 
the  workers.  Undoubtedly  Sunday's  work  may 
have  had  that  effect,  among  other  effects,  and 
undoubtedly  much  of  the  support,  financial  and 
personal,  donated  to  the  Sunday  campaigns  was 
donated  with  that  ulterior  purpose  either  con- 
sciously or  unconsciously  in  mind.  But  to  ex- 
plain away  the  Sunday  revivals  solely  or  even 
chiefly  in  such  terms  was  to  reveal  ignorance  of 
the  normal  frame  of  mind  of  many  Americans, 
which  those  revivals  served  to  illuminate.  Prob- 
ably nothing  would  be  of  greater  value  to  the 
Socialist  movement  than  some  development  which 
would  compel  each  of  its  leaders  to  spend  six 
months  in  a  town  like  Marion,  Ohio,  and  the  thou- 
sands of  other  communities  where  the  type  of 


SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  191 

mind  which  shouts  Amen  to  Billy  Sunday  theology 
is  the  dominant  type  of  mind.  Or  else  to  pay 
weekly  visits  to  the  scattered  farmhouses  of  Kan- 
sas and  Georgia ;  for  to  judge  by  the  Socialist  cam- 
paigns of  the  past,  the  Socialist  leaders  appear 
ignorant  that  the  average  American  farmer  is 
hostile  to  "big  business"  at  the  same  time  that 
he  is  complacent  towards  or  else  uncomprehend- 
ing of  ' '  capitalism. "  It  is  one  of  the  encouraging 
features  of  the  American  Socialist  movement  in 
1921  that  the  unpopularity  and  persecution  visited 
on  its  head  in  the  preceding  four  years  should 
have  partially  awakened  it  to  the  mental  reactions 
of  most  Americans — an  awakening  revealed  by  a 
moderation  in  the  1920  national  Socialist  platform 
as  regards  statement  of  principles  and  by  the 
couching  of  its  immediate  program  in  phraseology 
and  projects  comprehensible  to  most  voters. 

Consider  also  the  typical  Socialist  attitude  to- 
ward the  detention  by  the  "Wilson  administration 
of  the  conscientious  objectors.  To  most  Socialists, 
Secretary  of  War  Baker  was  abnormally  remiss 
and  hard-hearted  in  his  treatment  of  them  during 
the  War,  and  in  his  refusal  to  release  all  of  them 
immediately  after  the  armistice.  And  yet  the 
Wilson  administration's  treatment  of  the  "C. 
O.s,"  bitterly  denounced  by  most  Socialists  as  too 
stringent,  was  far  more  tender  than  the  treatment 
desired  by  most  Americans.  The  handling  of  the 
objectors  was  one  of  the  many  reasons  for  the 


192  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

t 
Wilson    administration's    general    unpopularity 

through  the  entire  country  during  and  after  hos- 
tilities against  Germany.  Indeed,  if  aside  from 
the  treatment  meted  out  to  the  "C.  O.s,"  the 
Democratic  Party  had  had  an  equal  chance  to  de- 
feat the  Republicans  in  the  1920  elections,  outcry 
against  the  "tenderness"  shown  the  conscientious 
objectors  would  probably  have  been  alone  suffi- 
cient to  turn  the  tide  of  battle  against  the  Dem- 
ocrats. The  American  Legion's  position  on  the 
subject  is  illuminating;  not  merely  because  the 
American  Legion  is  politically  powerful,  but  also 
because  it  is  well  representative  of  the  ideas  cur- 
rent in  most  Americans'  minds.  The  Socialists' 
ignorance  of  -the  bitterness  felt  by  most  sections 
of  public  opinion  towards  the  conscientious  ob- 
jectors is  but  another  evidence  of  their  ignorance 
of  American  public  opinion  generally. 

In  the  second  place,  the  American  Socialist 
movement  errs  flagrantly  in  both  disregarding 
and  misconceiving  the  role  played  by  personali- 
ties in  carrying  a  political  movement  to  fruition  by 
the  processes  of  political  democracy.  The  con- 
ventional Socialist  appeal  to  the  voters  is — "Vote 
for  a  principle,  not  for  a  personality ;  follow  a  new 
philosophy,  not  an  individual  leader. ' '  But  it  may 
be  seriously  doubted  if  that  appeal  is  practicable 
of  pursuit  by  the  great  mass  of  the  voters.  The 
difficulty  is  probably  an  intellectual  one.  The  ma- 
jority of  Americans,  if  not  also  the  majority  of 


SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  193 

all  the  western  European  races,  seem  unable  or 
unwilling  to  think  in  abstract  terms.  They  must 
think  and  vote  for  the  concrete,  and  the  abstract 
principle  and  the  new  philosophy  can  present 
themselves  to  their  minds  only  in  the  guise  of  a 
personality-  and  an  individual  leader.  Socialist 
exhorters  may  obtain  a  hearing  to  explain  what 
Socialism  is  and  at  what  it  aims,  but 'the  great 
mass  of  the  American  people  will  form  their  judg- 
ment of  Socialism  by  their  judgment  of  the 
Socialist  standard-bearers.  Even  the  compara- 
tively small  proportion  of  the  electorate  which  is 
reached  by  Socialist  addresses  and  pamphlets  is 
prone  to  visualize  the  true  character  of  Socialism 
by  those  Socialists  most  in  the  public  eye  today. 
When  the  Socialist  Party  arrives  at  a  stage  of 
strength  when  both  the  old  parties  concentrate 
their  .fire  upon  it,  most  of  the  electors,  in  their 
decision  as  to  the  contrast  between  the  new  system 
for  which  they  are  asked  to  vote  and  the  old  sys- 
tem under  which  they  will  be  living,  will  be  guided 
largely  by  the  personal  contrast  between  the  expo- 
nents of  the  new  system  and  the  proponents  of 
the  old. 

pne  of  the  reasons  for  the  American  Socialist 
movement's  comparatively  feeble  hold  upon  the 
American  people  lies  in  the,  failure  of  its  leaders 
to  impress  the  American  people  with  a  sense  of 
nobility  of  character  and  fineness  of  purpose.  The 
particular  political  and  economic  remedy  offered 


194  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

by  Socialism  for  our  present  ills  is  not  what  is 
connoted  to  the  average  voter  by  the  word  "  So- 
cialism. ' '  It  connotes  to  him,  rather,  a  scheme 
or  a  hope  for  a  generally  nobler  and  finer  civi- 
lization, different  from  our  present  civilization 
to  a  revolutionary  degree.  He  therefore  natural- 
ly, if  illogically,  expects  the  leaders  of  Socialism, 
or  even  the  rank  and  file  of  Socialists,  to  be  gen- 
erally nobler  and  finer  personal  types,  leading  lives 
of  purpose  different  to  a  revolutionary  degree 
from  the  life's  purposes  of  the  hoi  polloi.  Thus 
I  have  met  among  the  foreign-born  in  the  con- 
gested districts  of  one  of  our  great  cities  men  who 
had  been  inspired  by  the  example  of  Tolstoi ;  who 
were  elevated  by  the  very  mention  of  his  name 
or  the  sight  of  his  picture;  and  who  yet  admit- 
ted that  they  had  read  none  of  his  writings,  and, 
indeed,  had  little  knowledge  as  to  just  what  sort 
of  writings  they  were.  It  was  the  example  of  his 
personal  career  that  had  impressed  them.  In  our 
own  country,  si  parva  licet  componere  magnis,  the 
personal  faith  inspired  in  great  masses  of  our 
humbler  citizens  by  William  Jennings  Bryan  may 
well  have  been  one  of  the  most  valuable  assets  of 
the  Democratic  Party  in  the  last  several  decades. 
Tolstoi  was  hopelessly  visionary,  of  course,  and 
Bryan's  mind  is  inelastic;  but  the  Socialist  move- 
ment will  hardly  succeed  without  leaders  who  can 
inspire  personal  following  as  those  men  inspired 
it.  Indeed,  unless  our  present  information  is  too 


SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  195 

scanty  for  successful  analysis,  Socialism  in  Ger- 
many failed  to  keep  in  the  saddle,  after  its  un- 
paralleled opportunity  following  the  military  de- 
feat of  Germany  in  the  World  War,  very  largely 
because  there  was  no  German  Socialist  leader  or 
group  of  leaders  whb  could  arouse  in  the  German 
people's  breasts  sufficient  conviction  of  high  nobil- 
ity of  character  and  fineness  of  purpose  to  lead 
to  enthusiastic  faith  and  confidence. 

In  some  slight  campaigning  for  Socialism  in 
New  York  City,  the  greatest  single  stumbling- 
block  I  have  encountered  in  the  task  of  converting 
my  audiences  has  been  the  fact  that  one  of  the 
most  prominent  Socialist  leaders  happens  to  be 
associated  with  a  large  retail  coal  monopoly  in 
that  city.  It  has  proved  of  little  avail  to  retort 
that  the  audience  was  being  asked  to  vote  for  a 
principle,  not  for  a  personality;  and  that  the 
desirability  of  Socialism  was  not  to  be  confounded 
with  the  personal  business  relations  of  any  indi- 
vidual Socialist.  Of  little  more  avail  were  the  re- 
torts that  the  gentleman  in  question  was,  after  all, 
asking  the  electorate  to  vote  him  out  of  a  job  by 
removing  the  coal  business  from  private  into  pub- 
lic hands ;  that  he  had  waxed  far  less  prosperous 
than  if  he  had  not  devoted  most  of  his  life  to  the 
furtherance  of  Socialism,  and  comparatively  little 
of  it  to  the  prosecution  of  his  profession ;  that  he 
had  manifestly  proved  his  sincerity  by  all  but 
laying  down  his  life  for  his  cause ;  or  even  that  it 


196  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

was  impossible  to  live  according  to  Socialistic 
tenets  under  a  capitalistic  system.  For  even  the 
few  dollars  that  a  conscientious  Socialist  might 
deposit  in  savings  banks  or  invest  in  life  insur- 
ance might  well  be  used  to  buy  houses  from  which 
high  rentals  would  be  charged  working-class  ten- 
ants. Despite  all  logical  refutation,  the  fact  alone 
was  damning  to  an  electorate  which  seems  in- 
curably disposed  to  think  politically  in  terms  of 
personality — and  there  was  always  the  lurking 
suspicion  that,  after  all,  it  might  not  be  alto- 
gether unfair  nor  unwise  to  gauge  a  movement's 
fitness  for  confidence  by  its  leaders'  adherence  to 
its  tenets  in  their  own  lives. 

For  this  reason,  the  personality  of  Eugene  Vic- 
tor Debs  probably  has  been  the  most  valuable 
single  asset  of  the  Socialist  Party  of  America. 
(This  statement  is  in  no  wise  related  to  the  wis- 
dom or  folly  of  nominating  Debs  for  the  Presi- 
dency while  he  wa^  serving  a  jail  sentence.)  Were 
he  still  the  Socialist  Party's  nominee  for  Presi- 
dent, and  still  available  for  the  office,  when  the 
Socialist  Party  might  be  seriously  considered  as 
a  contender  for  the  Presidency,  the  inherent  no- 
bility of  his  personality  and  of  his  career  would 
rally  more  support  to  the  Socialist  ticket  than 
would  come  from  the  nomination  of  a  candidate 
who  inspired  more  confidence  as  an  administrator 
and  as  a  thinker-through  of  problems,  but  less  en- 
thusiasm as  a  personality.  To  this,  your  orthodox 


SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  197 

^ocialisf  will,  of  course,  reply  indignantly  that 
such  support  is  worse  than  none  at  all,  and  that 
Socialism  must  not  come  until  such  day  as  the 
working-class  has  been  educated  to  Socialism's 
significance.  But  it  is  supremely  difficult  to  edu- 
cate the  working-class  or  any  other  class  to  the 
conception  of  a  new  state  of  society  which  has  not 
yet  been  concretely  realized.  Their  final  educa- 
tion along  these  lines  may  well  have  to  await  the 
day  when  a  Socialist  administration  begins  to 
legislate  the  new  state  of  society  into  concrete 
being,  and  when  thus  the  people  are  shown  the 
aims  of  Socialism  in  actuality. 

It  had  become  by  1921  a  platitude  to  explain  the 
British  political  situation  by  saying  that  Lloyd 
George  was  a  splendid  leader  without  a  party, 
and  that  the  British  Labor  Party  was  a  splendid 
party  without  a  leader.  If  even  so  well-organized 
and  so  discerning  a  radical  political  movement 
as  the  British  Labor  Party  finds  itself  handicapped 
by  the  lack  of  a  leader  or  leaders  who  can  capture 
the  popular  imagination,  how  much  more  does  the 
poorly  organized  and  undiscerning  American 
Socialist  movement  suffer  from  that  lack !  A  sin-> 
gle  Socialist  chieftain  of  the  Roosevelt  type,; 
a  powerful  exhorter  and  yet  an  able  administra- 
tor, would  be  the  greatest  of  boons  to  the  Socialist 
Party  of  America.  Swept  into  office  by  even  an 
electorate  uneducated  to  class-consciousness  and 
the  program  of  the  cooperative  commonwealth,  his 


198  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

very  legislative  and  administrative  achievements 
after  election  would  provide  most  of  the  elector- 
ate's necessary  enlightenment.  Conversely,  a  So- 
cialist movement  which  by  many  painstaking  cam- 
paigns had  finally  come  into  power  without  a 
Roosevelt  could  almost  certainly  be  swept  out  of 
power  by  the  appearance  on  the  political  scene  of 
an  anti-Socialist  Roosevelt,  no  matter  how  thor- 
ough the  Socialist  education  of  the  electorate 
might  have  been. 

Bearing  upon  this  point,  one  of  the  sections  of 
the  Socialist  Party's  national  constitution  must 
seem  particularly  mischievous.  It  is  that  which 
requires  a  Comrade  to  have  been  a  member  of  the 
Party  for  at  least  two  years  before  he  may  be 
nominated  or  endorsed  for  any  public  office  by 
any  Party  subdivision,  unless  the  subdivisions 
have  not  been  in  existence  for  two  years.  True, 
the  consent  of  the  state  organization  may  invali- 
date this  ruling,  but  that  consent  is  cumbersome 
of  attainment,  and  many  of  the  state  constitutions, 
notably  New  York's,  repeat  the  rule  of  the  na- 
tional constitution.  The  rule  was  obviously  de- 
signed to  prevent  a  popular  personality  from  en- 
tering the  Party  in  order  to  exploit  it  for  his 
personal  ends.  But  if  the  members  of  the  Party 
cannot  be  trusted  to  form  a  personal  judgment 
of  their  own  fellow  members,  with  what  can  they 
be  trusted,  particularly  since  in  the  selection  of 
their  nominees  the  tendency  would  be  to  select 


SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  199 

those  of  long  membership  and  service-record,  and 
since  there  inevitably  would  be  a  prejudice  against 
the  selection  for  high  nomination  of  a  recent  con- 
vert, no  matter  how  captivating  his  personality? 
Many  political  leaders  of-  national  or  at  least  of 
local  influence,  chafing  under  the  present  leader- 
ship of  the  old  political  parties,  must  be  restrained 
from  casting  in  their  lot  with  the  Socialists  only 
by  the  realization  that  thereby  they  would  be  ren- 
dering themselves  politically  impotent  for  leader- 
ship and  occupancy  of  public  office  for  a  period  of 
time.  This  procedure  is  especially  deplorable  in 
view  of  the  fact  that,  outside  of  Debs  and  some  ten 
or  twelve  other  chieftains,  the  Socialist  Party  of 
America  lacks  leaders  who  inspire  public  confi- 
dence or  general  popular  support,  so  that  for 
many  nominations  on  the  Socialist  ticket  the  only 
available  candidates  seem  to  be  of  the  type  which 
Mr.  H.  L.  Mencken  calls  the  "rabble-rouser." 

In  the  third  place,  and  as  a  corollary  of  the 
preceding  considerations,  the  Socialist  movement 
in  the  United  States  seems  blissfully  unaware  of 
the  part  played  by  administrative  ability  in  the 
conduct  of  Government,  capitalist  or  socialist. 
True,  this  disregard  of  the  personal  factor  in  guid- 
ing the  ship  of  state  may  have  little  effect  upon 
the  success  of  Socialist  political  campaigns.  But 
it  would  have  a  decisive  effect  upon  the  fortunes 
of  a  Socialist  state  if  the  electorate — ever  suscep- 
tible to  passing  whims  and  prone  to  perform  as- 


-       200  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

tgnishingly  at  the  polls— should  at  some  election 
in  the  near  future  suddenly  and  unexpectedly 
yield  to  the  Socialist  Party's  exhortations,  and 
•  return  it  to  power.  The  Socialists  evidently  pin 
their  faith  to  the  ability  of  the  untrained  prole- 
tariat, serene  in  the  confidence  that  executive  ex- 
perience will  prove  unnecessary  in  administering 
the  railroads  and  the  banks  pr  in  the  purchase  of 
building  materials  for  the  erection  of  schools  and 
apartment-houses.  The  more  conservative  Social- 
ists will  answer  that  the  Socialist  state  would  en- 
gage for  those  tasks  the  McAdoos  and  the  Kineses 
and  the  Vanderlips  and  the  Hoovers,  and  there 
will  be  little  dispute  that  they  should  be  so  en- 
gaged. But  it  may  well  be  doubted  if  the  temper 
of  most  of  the  membership  of  the  Socialist  Party 
at  the  present  time  would  sanction  or  tolerate  the 
hiring  of  these  bourgeois  experts  for  the  highest 
offices  within  the  Socialist  Government,  aside  from 
those  of  a  purely  technical  nature.  (And  this  in 
spite  of  the  example  set  by  Lenin.)  The  dream  of 
most  Socialists  is  an  all-Socialist  administration, 
following  success  at  the  polls;  and  at  the  pres- 
ent time  there  is  probably  not  sufficient  material 
within  the  Socialist  Party  of  America  to  fill  effi- 
ciently merely  the  ten  Cabinet  positions.  And 
even  if  the  mass  of  the  Socialists  could  be  recon- 
ciled to  seeing  the  Socialist  state  working  out  its 
destiny  through  the  medium  of  non-Socialist  or 
even  anti-Socialist  expert  administrators,  it  may 


SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  201 

be  doubted  also  if  the  McAdoos  and  the  Hooveps 
would  accept  the  positions  offered.  For  the  po- 
litical parties  to  which  they  belong  would  almost 
certainly  be  feverishly  planning  to  upset  the; 
Socialist  Government  at  the  next  election.  More- 
over, the  pressure  of  their  business  and  social  con- 
nections would  probably  rather  keep  them  at  the 
task  of  administering  private  enterprises  still  in 
competition  with  the  Government  enterprises  (and 
at  the  inception  of  a  Socialist  Government  there 
would  be  many  of  them)  so  efficiently  as  to  bring 
business  defeat  upon  the  enterprises  being  con- 
ducted for  the  Socialist  Government  by  largely 
untrained  and  untried  proletarians,  by  intellec- 
tuals or  by  mass-meeting  speakers,  and  hence  so 
as  to  bring  ruin  and  repudiation  upon  the  entire 
Socialist  administration.  - 

In  this  connection,  there  may  be  considered  the 
common  objection  to  the  Socialist  program  on  the 
ground  that  Governmental  activities  make  for 
graft  and  inefficiency.  To  this  objection,  the  con- 
ventional Socialist  reply  is  four-fold.  (1)  The 
maximum  as  well  as  the  minimum  income  in  the 
Socialist  state  might  be  fixed,  so  that  if  an  in- 
dividual's income  in  any  year  rose  sharply  beyond 
that  which  he  could  realize  from  his  salary  and 
his  past  savings,  it  would  cause  suspicion  and 
investigation.  Obviously,  a  Socialist  state  should 
be  better  able  to  ferret  out  concealed  income  than 
our  present  capitalist  state.  The  grafter  would 


202  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

find  it  harder  to  translate  his  graft  into  a  form 
which  would  redound  soon  and  appreciably  to  his 
credit;  and  although  this  method  could  not  be 
counted  upon  completely  to  eliminate  graft,  yet 
it  should  go  far  to  make  graft  less  frequent, 
smaller  in  amount  and  more  difficult  of  attain- 
ment. (2)  The  inefficiency  in  the  present  Gov- 
ernment service  is  due  largely  to  the  greater 
inducements  offered  by  private  enterprise,  a  con- 
trast which  should  be  eliminated  in  the  Cooper- 
ative Commonwealth.  (3)  The  present  Govern- 
mental activities  do  not  affect  the  daily  lives  of 
most  people  in  ways  that  they  can  directly  ascer- 
tain; whereas  when  the  Government  takes  over 
the  milk' supply  and  the  grocery  stores  and  the 
department  stores,  people  will  understand  directly 
how  they  are  benefited  or  injured.  Thus,  when 
even  railroad  service  is  inefficient,  it  is  apt  to  be 
only  the  business  men  who  complain,  while  the 
great  mass  of  the  voters  are  apathetic  to  the  at- 
tack thus  launched  upon  their  pocketbooks.  But 
let  graft  and  inefficiency  raise  the  cost  of  milk 
several  cents  a  quart,  or  meat  five  cents  a  pound, 
or  overcoats  five  dollars  each,  or  kerosene  three 
cents  a  gallon,  or  apartment  rentals  one  hundred 
dollars  a  year,  and  the  people  will  rout  out  the 
graft  and  inefficiency  thus  brought  home  so  naked- 
ly to  their  daily  lives.  Similarly,  when  the  politi- 
cal sagacity  of  the  electorate  is  decried,  the  Social- 
ist replies  that  the  voter  is  better  able  to  form  an 


SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  203 

intelligent  opinion  of  the  kind  of  service  he  is  get- 
ting in  the  furnishing  of  milk,  clothing  and  housing 
$ian  of  the  kind  of  service  he  is  getting  in  for- 
eign relations,  property  evaluation  for  taxes  and 
even  tariff  administration.  Indeed,  it  may  well 
be  that  the  projection  of  the  Government  into  the 
fields  of  clothing  and  housing  and  food  may  prove 
a  most  serviceable  step  in  insuring  an  intelli- 
gent selection  of  public  officials  by  the  electorate. 
(4)  And  finally,  the  Socialist  answers  that  even" 
granting  individual  graft  and  inefficiency,  the  loss 
due  to  them  will  be  more  than  atoned  for  by  the 
elimination  of  the  social  graft  and  inefficiency 
known  as  the  acquisition  of  profits.  A  five  per 
cent  loss  on  transactions  due  to  graft  and  another 
five  per  cent  due  to  inefficiency  should  be  more 
than  met  by  the  elimination  of  the  loss  due  to  al- 
lowing a  certain  percentage  as  profit  to  owners 
— and  in  the  months  following  the  War,  few  were 
the  transactions  in  which  net  profits  were  as  low 
as  ten  per  cent. 

However,  the  last  of  these  considerations  may 
prove  less  valid  than  the  three  preceding.  For 
it  is  probable  that  in  the  United  States  Socialism 
will  arrive,  if  it  arrives  at  all,  by  slow  gradations 
rather  than  by  an  abrupt  break.  And  in  the  course 
of  those  gradations,  it  is  almost  inevitable  that 
sops  will  be  thrown  to  the  growing  pro-Socialist 
sentiment  in  the  form  of  further  and  further  Gov- 
ernment supervision  over  the  private  enterprises 


204  THE  LAKGER  SOCIALISM 

for  which,  the  Socialists  demand  Government  own- 
ership and  operation.  Just  so,  the  feeling  for 
Government  ownership  and  operation  of  the 
railroads  has  been  staved  off  by  creating  an  In- 
terstate Commerce  Commission,  and  by  granting 
it  increased  powers  over  railroad  rates  and  hence 
over  railroad  profits,  routing,  equipment  and  gen- 
eral service.  And  if  a  Socialist  State  were  to 
take  over  the  ownership  and  management  of 
industries  whose  operations,  and  especially  whose 
profits,  had  previously  been  rigorously  regulated, 
there  might  well  be  little  social  graft  in  the  form 
of  profits  left  to  be  eliminated. 

That  is,  the  profits  being  made  under  the  system 
of  state  regulation  preceding  the  assumption  of 
state  ownership  and  management  might  well  be 
hardly  above  the  legitimate  interest  for  the  use 
of  capital.  And  legitimate  interest  for  the  use  of 
capital  will  have  to  be  paid  by  the  state  as  owner 
and  operator  no  less  than  by  a  private  owner  and 
operator.  (Much  of  the  current  criticism  of  the 
Socialist  program  by  professional  political  econ- 
'  omists  is  based  on  the  belief  that  Socialism  over- 
looks the  need  of  paying  for  the  use  of  capital  by 
means  of  interest.  The  truth  is,  of  course,  that 
Socialism  would  have  the  state  furnish  the 
capital.  But  this  misunderstanding  is  hardly  un- 
expected, in  view  of  the  seeming  ignorance  of  so 
many  American  economists  that  there  is  a  Social- 
ism which  is  not  Marxian  and  which  is  based  on 


v  SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  205 

something  beside  the  labor  theory  of  value.)  If 
the  Government  were  to  take  over  the  railroads, 
for  instance,  from  their  operation  would  have  to 
be  met  the  interest  on  the  enormous  bond  issue 
floated  to  buy  them,  even  at  their  physical  valua- 
tion alone;  or  else  the  interest  to  be  guaranteed 
the  owners  of  the  railroad  securities,  in  case  the 
Government  adopted  that  plan  of  conducting  the 
railroad  enterprises.  Under  such  circumstances, 
the  question  as  to  whether  the  operation  .of  rail- 
roads and  of  other  large  business  undertakings 
under  Socialism  would  prove  more  economical 
than  their  operation  under  the  capitalist  system 
would  probably  hinge  upon  the  availability  to  the 
Socialist  state  of  the  services  of  a  McAdoo  or  a 
Hines  or  a  Hoover. 

At  all  events,  the  assumption  of  power  by  a 
Socialist  administration  which  would  turn  over 
the  reins  of  Government  to  officials  who  neither 
by  experience  nor  by  personal  ability  hafl  been 
trained  to  administer  would  spell  ruin.  For  the 
technical  work  in  the  clothing  factories,  the  pack- 
ing-houses and  the  railway  repair  shops,  the  work- 
ers themselves  could  be  confidently  held  responsi- 
ble-'-or  else  the  principle  and  practise  of  de- 
mocracy hold  no  meaning.  But  in  sheer  executive 
administration  qua  executive  administration,  the 
proletariat  can  hardly  be  relied  upon  to  acquit  it- 
self nobly.  We  in  the  United  States  have  been 
told  that  leaders  of  the  British  Labor  Party, 


206  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

with  its  respectable  roster  of  trained  executive  ad- 
ministrators of  reputation,  privately  admit  that 
British  Labor  has  not  yet  developed  sufficient 
executive  ability  to  administer  the  complex  affairs 
of  the  British  Empire.  How  much  more  earnestly, 
then,  should  the  untried  American  Socialist  move- 
ment take  thought  on  this  problem  of  administra- 
tive ability  as  it  campaigns  for  offices  of  high 
responsibility!  The  difficulties  of  meeting  the 
problems  of  government  administration  in  a 
Socialist  state  cannot  be  pushed  aside  by  empha- 
sizing the  all-too-apparent  inefficiency  of  the  high- 
est administrators  in  the  capitalist  state  and  in 
the  capitalist  system,  any  more  than  by  romanti- 
cally endowing  the  proletariat  with  a  sudden  gift 
of  administrative  genius  when  once  it  has  the 
power  to  obtain  the  full  product  of  its  toil. 

In  the  fourth  place,  the  Socialist  movement  in 
the  United  States,  like  the  other  radical  or  "lib- 
eral" movements,  must  learn  the  essentially  un- 
intellectual  nature  of  the  electorate's  interests  and 
sympathies.  The  electorate's  most  open  avenue 
of  approach  is  not  that  of  reasoning;  the  appeal 
for  its  support  must  warm  the  cockles  of  its  emo- 
tions before  success  may  be  dreamed  of.  And 
its  emotions  are  sunk  deep  in  prejudices  and 
preconceptions  which  either  are  not  realized  by 
most  of  those  who  read  and  write  books  and 
weekly  reviews,  or  else  the  strength  of  which  is 
not  appreciated  by  the  book-readers  and  -writ- 


SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  207 

ers.  The  concepts  which  control  the  decisions  of 
the  man  in  the  street  have  been  handed  down  from 
generation  to  generation  almost  unaffected  by  the 
education  and  the  culture  of  the  intellectual 
classes.  There  is  too  much  calm  assumption  that 
information  will  work  up  and  down  from  one  intel- 
lectual class  to  another,  instead  of  frank  recog- 
nition that  the  tendency  is  rather  for  information 
to  expand  laterally  within  the  same  intellectual 
class.  There  is  a  more  violent  contrast  be- 
tween the  current  concepts  of  the  upper  and  lower 
intellectual  classes  within  a  given  nation  of  even 
a  homogeneous  culture  than  between  the  general 
national  concepts  of  whole  nations  even  so  dis- 
similar in  their  cultures  as  France  and  the  United 
States.  It  may  well  be  doubted  if  even  the  least 
cloistered  leaders  of  the  Socialist  and  other  radi- 
cal and  liberal  movements  have  more  than  the 
faintest  understanding  of  the  concepts  of  the  man 
in  the  street  regarding  religious  differences,  sex 
morality,  the  place  of  woman  generally  in  the 
scheme  of  the  Universe,  the  value  of  college  edu- 
cation, the  questioning  of  conventions,  polished 
manners,  the  habit  of  criticism,  and  all  the 
other  manifold  personal  concepts  which  not  only 
enter  into,  but  even  determine,  the  man  in  the 
street's  judgment  of  political  parties  and  move- 
ments. The  "intelligentsia"  in  New  York  recent- 
ly made  merry  when  a  high  official  of  the  New 
York  City  government  decried  libraries  as  " places 


208  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

where  people  read  themselves  to  death  and  then 
come  out  with  theories  to  overthrow  the  Govern- 
ment," and  when  another  high  official  of  the  same 
government  announced  that  policemen  were  better 
off  without  much  education ;  but  the  intelligentsia 
fails  to  appreciate  how  high  a  percentage  of  the 
population,  especially  the  male  population,  en-^ 
dorses  these  statements  of  the  New  York  City  offi- 
cials. 

It  is  this  comprehension  of  the  true  nature  of 
the  masses '  mental  processes  which  is  signified  by. 
the  phrase,  "Understanding  politics."  When  a 
college  professor  or  a  society  matron  is  rejected 
by  the  cognoscenti  as  a  candidate  for  a  political 
nomination  on  the  grounds  of  "not  understanding 
politics,"  the  rejection  does  not  mean  primarily 
that  politics  and  the  game  of  politics  have  rules, 
methods  and  tactics  which  are  apart  from  other 
fields  of  human  endeavor,  and  which  must  be  care- 
fully studied  and  mastered  of  and  for  themselves. 
It  means  rather  that  the  college  professor  or  the 
society  matron  is  blissfully  unaware  of  the  ac- 
tual mental  reasoning,  prejudices  and  allegiances 
of  the  great  mass  of  the  people  who  make  up  the 
country.  Some  day  an  iconoclastic  sociologist, 
abandoning  his  text  books,  his  prehistoric  excava- 
tions and  his  psychological  laboratory,  will  achieve 
an  enviable  reputation  overnight  by  living  for 
several  years  wholly  in  such  an  environment  as 
is  to  be  found,  for  instance,  in  the  Lower  West 


SOME,  CONSIDERATIONS  209 

Side  of  New  York  City  and  eventually  publishing 
to  a  startled  world  of  book-readers  and  -writers 
a  list  and  discussion  of  what  the  book-readers  and 
-writers  will  very  accurately  term  the  mediaeval 
conceptions  and  prejudices  which  guide  the  opin- 
ions of  the  great  majority  of  Americans. 

For  instance,  the  greatest  obstacle  now  hinder- 
ing the  growth  of  Socialist  sentiment  in  the  United 
States  is  a  deep  suspicion  in  the  minds  of  many 
voters  that  Socialism  is  fundamentally  a  Jewish 
movement,  designed  to  further  the  aims  of  Jewry ; 
and  also  a  movement  which  favors,  practises,  and 
would  establish  what  is  euphemistically  described 
as  "free  love."  Doubtless,  the  inculcation  of  this 
belief  was  inevitable,  and  is  in  no  wise  to  be 
blamed  upon  the  Socialist  movement.  But  so  long 
as  that  belief  persists,  it  will  be  difficult  for  the 
movement  to  get  ahead.  Probably  it  is  chiefly  in 
the  small  towns  and  the  rural  districts  that  the 
"free  love"  accusation  is  credited,  for  in  the 
larger  centers  most  non-Socialists  have  come 
sufficiently 'into  personal  contact  with  Socialists  to 
recognize  that  in  the  field  of  morals  the  Socialists 
rank  at  least  no  lower  than  the  remainder  of  the 
population.  But  it  is  just  in  the  larger  centers 
that  the  Socialist  membership  seems  to  be  dispro- 
portionately Jewish.  It  is  not  a  question  of  ex- 
plaining the  fact  or  of  deploring  anti-Semitism-; 
it  is  a  question  of  recognizing  the  strength  of  this 
factor  which  influences  the  situation  in  actuality. 


210  THE  LAEGER  SOCIALISM 

As  a  matter  of  practical  tactics,  therefore,  the 
Socialist  movement's  chief  point  of  attack  for 
the  present  should  be  the  "free  love"  and  the 
^iJTewish  movement"  allegations. 

And  the  attack  must  not  confine  itself  to  pam- 
phlets and  statistics,  meetings  of  protest  and 
similar  agencies  which,  so  far  as  the  mass  of  the 
people  are  concerned,  may  well  be  considered  "in- 
tellectual." Again,  the  leaders  of  the  Socialist 
and  the  other  radical  and  liberal  movements  are 
wont  to  overestimate  the  influence  of  the  printed 
word  in  forming  public  opinion.  It  is  not  merely 
the  unwillingness  of  large  proportions  of  people 
to  read  written  argument;  it  is  also  their  sheer 
inability  to  understand  it  or  to  concentrate  their 
minds  upon  it.  I  have  met  people  to  whom  the 
pages  of  the  Saturday  Evening  Post  seemed  ex- 
tremely difficult  and  heavy  reading,  and  who  were 
by  no  means  quasi-illiterate  or  foreign-born — in- 
deed, were  of  the  economically  well-to-do.  And 
it  is  not  alone  such  persons  whose  opinions  are 
formed  by  rumors  and  whispered  gossip — even 
many  of  those  who  have  read  a  pamphlet  will 
disbelieve  it  on  the  word  of  a  friend  who  has  a 
friend  who  told  him,  etc.  American  public  opin- 
ion on  the  welfare  of  Labor  at  the  present  time, 
for  instance,  revolves  around  the  rumor  that  most 
workingmen  made  a  practise  of  buying  twelve- 
dollar  silk  shirts  in  the  years  of  war  far  more 
effectively,  so  far  as  a  vote  at  the  polls  would 


SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  211 

be  concerned,  than  around  the  detailed  and  pains- 
taking figures  on  the  cost  of  living  and  wages 
issued  by  the  Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics.  With- 
out attempting  to  construct  a  comprehensive 
campaign  program  for  the  American  Socialist 
movement,  I  think  it  could  be  proved  that  at  the 
present  time  far  more  helpful  to  it  than  all  its, 
street  meetings  and  pamphlets  would  be  an  active, 
representative  and  country-wide  campaign  by  a 
group  of  Christian  Socialists,  with  as  large  a  pro- 
portion of  Christian  ministers  as  possible,  telling 
the  country  at  large  that  to  them  the  aims  of  So- 
cialism, and  the  aims  of  Socialism  alone  among  the 
political  parties,  were  synonymous  with  the  ideals 
of  Christianity  as  applied  to  government.  Along 
with  such  a  campaign,  of  course,  would  have  to  go 
a  strong  increase  of  membership  in  the  Socialist 
movement  from  the  non-Jewish  elements  of  the 
population,  so  that  there  would  no  longer  be  a 
disproportionate  number  of  Jews  in  the  Social- 
ist ranks. 

Finally,  the  Socialist  movement  would  do  well 
to  emphasize  more  strongly  than  at  present  its 
remedy  against  a  possible  excess  of  population 
arising  through  increased  social  welfare — in- 
creased income  to  the  family  for  each  child  only 
to  the  limited  number  of  children  seen  to  be  de- 
sirable for  the  continuation  of  that  social  welfare, 
with  even  decreased  wages  or  salaries  for  parents 
who  have  children  too  far  in  excess  of  the  limit 


212  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

set,  unless  possibly  by  exceptions  allowed 
those  with  manifestly  ana  abnormally  favorable 
heredity. 

On  this  entire  question  of  tactics,  it  may  be 
remarked  in  conclusion  that  for  a  person  sympa- 
thetic with  the  aims  of  Socialism,  the  only  posi- 
tion of  effectiveness  at  present  seems  to  be  with- 
in the  political  Socialist  movement  in  America. 
True,  the  most  satisfactory  organization  would 
manifestly  be  a  general  radical  holding  company, 
with  the  several  groups  maintaining  their  own  au- 
tonomy, their  own  creeds  and  their  own  platforms, 
and  constantly  endeavoring  to  convert  their  as- 
sociates to  their  own  way  of  thinking;  but  in  politi- 
cal campaigns,  and  against  the  common  enemy, 
loyally  maintaining  a  united  front  in  accord  with 
the  majority  decision  within  the  general  inclusive 
organization.  However,  such  a  desideratum  seems 
not  to  be  possible  at  present,  unless  by  an  almost 
unbelievable  identification  of  President  Harding 'a 
administration  with  all  the  forces  of  reactionary 
capitalism.  With  all  its  faults  of  both  principle 
and  practise,  there  is  yet  no  other  vehicle  so  read- 
ily available  as  the  Socialist  Party  to  carry  for- 
ward the  Socialist  message  in  the  United  States. 
It  should  be  as  practicable,  if  not  more  practi- 
cable,* to  bore  at  it  from  within  as  at  the  Ameri- 
can Federation  of  Labor.  It  will  hardly  be  con- 
tended that  either  of  the  old  political  parties,  as 


SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  213 

they  are  now  constituted,  can  be  headed  toward  a 
socialistic  goal,  be  it  ever  so  thickly  disguised 
under  other  names.  Capitalistic  ideology  has  a 
firm  grip  upon  the  dictators  of  the  Republican 
Party's  policies,  and  the  voting  strength  of  the 
Democratic  Party  lies  in  the  negro-baiting  South 
and  among  the  Southern  agricultural  Junkers.  It 
was  no  accident  that  a  Burleson  was  high  in 
power  in  the  last  Democratic  administration — in- 
deed, it  was  largely  through  his  and  his  type's  in- 
fluence with  the  Southern  congressmen  and  sena- 
tors that  the  considerable  legislative  achieve- 
ments of  the  first  Wilson  administration  were 
realized;  and  the  marvel  was  rather  that  from 
1913  to  1921  there  were  so  few  Burlesons  in  high 
positions. 

As  for  "Liberalism,"  it  has  proved  itself  pecu- 
liarly futile,  even  more  futile  than  the  Socialist 
movement.  The  creed  which  is  loosely  called 
" Liberalism"  in  America  today  has  undoubtedly 
rendered  great  service  in' the  past  and  will  conceiv- 
ably render  great  service  in  the  future.  Liberal- 
ism in  England  has  been  invaluable  to  the  cause  of 
progress.  But  it  seems  to  me  that  there  is  one 
paralyzing  difference  between  the  liberalism  of 
Gladstone  and  Morley,  which,  after  all,  was  effec- 
tive and  forward-urging,  and  the  creed  which  now 
calls  itself  liberalism  in  America.  The  liberalism 
of  Gladstone  and  Morley  was  couched  in  ethical 
formulas  which,  however  platitudinous  and  even 


214  THE  LAKGER  SOCIALISM 

hypocritical,  yet  bore  within  them  the  germs  of 
inspiration  and  enthusiasm  for  the  great  mass  of 
the  people.  "Whereas  such  a  liberalism  as  that 
Represented  by  the  New  Republic,  for  instance, 
seems  to  be  concerned  primarily  with  administra- 
;'.tive  technique  and  intellectual  efficiency.  Those 
who  have  followed  the  development  of  the  pres- 
ent-day American  movement  or  creed  known  as 
Liberalism  surely  will  agree  that  it  hardly  fits  into 
the  definition  of  liberalism  which  Morley  gives 
in  his  "Recollections,"  beginning  with  "  Respect 
for  the  dignity  and  worth  of  the  individual  is  its 
(Liberalism's)  root."  And  emphasis  on  efficiency 
and  technique  alone,  however  necessary  and  how- 
ever more  serviceable  ultimately  than  recourse 
to  mere  undefined  and  unanalyzed  ethical  plati- 
tudes, can  hardly  rally  popular  support  around  it. 
At  all  events,  and  whatever  the  causes,  our 
American  liberals  have  proved  themselves  inef- 
fective in  the  maelstrom  of  the  past  several  years, 
and  their  liberalism  has  been  sadly  discredited. 
The  Presidential  election  of  1920  was  proof  suffi- 
cient that  they  had  no  power  to  guide  either  of 
the  major  political  parties  toward  Liberalism's 
goals;  and  by  remaining  outside  of  the  Social- 
ist movement,  they  left  little  impression  upon 
the  country.  And  the  power  of  the  trade-union 
movement  to  accomplish  the  ends  of  Socialism 
need  not  be  discussed  here,  for  the  question  is  of 
political  action.  Individual  Socialists  as  well  as 


^. 

SOME  CONSIDERATIONS       V     V 

j    ; 

the  Socialist  Party  of  America  are  actiVefy  sup- 
porting the  trade-unions,  both  those  in  the  Ameri- 
can Federation  of  Labor  and  those  outside  tne 
Pale. 

I  have  reserved  for  the  last  any  mention  of  the 
Farmer-Labor  Party  because  in  essence  the  Farm- 
er-Labor Party  is  a  mildly  Socialistic  movement. 
It  seems  to  recognize  the  class  struggle,  if  only 
distantly.  It  emerges  from  its  first  presidential 
campaign,  in  1920,  with  practically  no  farmer 
support,  despite  its  name;  and  with  a  platform 
hardly  to  be  distinguished  from  the  immediate 
platform  of  the  Socialist  Party,  except  for  a 
slightly  greater  admixture  of  self-government  in 
industry  than  the  latter.  The  Farmer-Labor 
Party  is  still  too  young  and  its  future  too  uncer- 
tain for  prediction  concerning  its  ultimate  service 
to  be  more  than  f oolhardiness ;  only  time  can  tell 
whether  it  or  the  Socialist  Party  is  better  quali- 
fied to  advance  the  Socialist  banner.  Similarly, 
only  time  can  tell  whether  there  is  sufficient  en- 
thusiasm for  it  among  its  members  to  inspire  them 
to  perform  between  elections,  without  hope  of 
reward  in  the  shape  of  political  office,  the  routine 
organization  work  and  propaganda  necessary  for 
its  permanence  and  success.  However,  one  essen- 
tial difference  between  it  and  the  Socialist  Party 
of  America  at  the  present  time  must  be  stressed. 
It  is  that,  however  much  the  two  platforms  may 
agree,  and  however  much  more  realistic  the  Social- 


214        ,       ••      THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

1st  phnkBjrology  has  become  than  in  previous  years, 
the  ultimate  aims  of  the  Socialists  are  revolu- 
tionary. Everyone  understands  that  a  socialist 
society  will  differ  from  our  present  capitalist  so- 
ciety to  a  revolutionary  degree  in  almost  all  phases 
of  human  activity.  If  the  1920  program  of  the 
Farmer-Labor  Party  should  be  realized,  the  eco- 
nomic problem  of  the  ownership  of  the  basic  in- 
dustries would  be  solved  largely  according  to  the 
Socialist  formula,  but  a  wholly  revolutionary  pro- 
gram would  otherwise  hardly  be  attempted.  There 
would  be  a  radical  change  in  industry,  but  hardly 
a  radical  change  in  the  point  of  view  dominating 
society  as  a  whole.  Whereas,  by  plain  implication 
as  well  as  .by  frank  confession,  the  Socialist  Party 
aims,  however  crudely,  at  a  wholly  new  social  point 
of  view.  The  former  at  present  stands  for  a  nar- 
row Socialism ;  the  latter  aims,  or  may  be  made  to 
aim,  at  a  larger  Socialism. 


CHAPTER  VIIL 

THE     LABGEE     SOCIALISM. 

i 

THE  larger  Socialism  stands  for  the  adoption  of 
so  comprehensive  a  Socialist  point  of  view,  and 
for  its  adoption  in  so  liberal  and  so  empirical  a 
spirit,  as  to  assist  materially  in  the  success  of  all 
other  revolutionary,  radical  or  even  merely  liberal 
movements  and  thought  also  working  toward  a 
better  adjusted  universe.  The  larger,  Socialism 
refuses  to  stop  at  the  socialization  of ~  industry. 
It  believes  that  the  principle  of  Socialism  will  be 
served  .as  inadequately  by  its  application  only  in 
industry  as  the  principle  of  democracy  has  been 
served  by  its  application  only  in  political  govern- 
ment. It  realizes  that  the  political  Socialist 
movement  bears  to  Socialism  as  a  whole  much  the 
same  relation  that  woman  suffrage  bears  to  the 
woman's  movement  as  a  whole.  It  insists  that  the 
material  welfare  resulting  from  the  advent  of 
Socialism  shall  be  used  merely  as  the  foundation 
on  which  to  build  loftier  structures.  The  larger 
Socialism  recognizes  that  along  with  and  depen- 
dent upon  the  success  of  the  political  and  economic 
Socialist  movement  there  must  proceed  to  their 

217 


218  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

fruition  such  movements  as  eugenics  and  femi- 
nism, for  example.  The  elimination  of  the  congeni- 
tally  unfit,  the  transformation  of  the  married 
woman  from  an  economic  dependent,  the  endow- 
ment of  motherhood,  the  conscious  control  of  con- 
ception, the  application  of  similar  standards  of 
sex  morality  to  women  and  men,  the  liberalization 
of  family  ties,  the  scientific  training  of  children 
before  the  kindergarten  age  as  accepted  at  pres- 
ent— these  and  similar  derivatives  of  the  eugenics 
movement  and  the  woman 's  movement  are  but  faint 
reminders  of  the  inadequacy  of  a  Socialism  that 
will  end  its  exertions  with  the  triumph  of  Social- 
ism in  socially-necessary  industry  and  in  Govern- 
ment. The  larger  Socialism  understands  that  in 
its  political  platform  it  cannot  include  such  con- 
tentious non-political  reforms,  but  it  understands 
also  that  it  must  throw  its'  energies  into  the*  fur- 
therance of  such  reforms  when  its  political  pro- 
gram has  been  achieved.  Socialism  in  this  larger 
sense  thus  aims  not  merely -at  a  new  principle  in 
government  and  industry,  but  at  a  completely  new 
orientation  in  every  field  of  human  endeavor. 

The  underlying  concept  of  our  present  capital- 
ist society  is  that  the  individual  has  a  vested  right 
to  prosper  even  at  the  expense  of  society,  un- 
less the  social  damage  wrought  by  his  success  is 
too  glaring  and  too'  serious.  Production  occurs 
primarily  for  profit,  and*  only  through  the  oppor- 
tunity for  profit;  and  the  profit  accrues  to  the 


THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM  219 

individual  who  is  strong  and  crafty  enough  in  the 
competition  of  business  wits  to  climb  toward  the 
top  of  the  business  ladder.  Under  capitalism, 
business  ability  still  is  conceived  as  having  a 
vested  interest  in  society's  opportunities.  What- 
ever checks  exist  upon  the  able  business  man's 
exploitation  of  the  community's  needs  are  largely 
negative-r-we  have  forbidden  him  to  advance  him- 
self by  adulterating  food,  or  by  manufacturing 
whisky,  or  by  managing  roulette  wheels  and  faro 
games.  For  the  rest,  he  is  entitled  to  wring  trib- 
ute from  society  in  the  form  of  profits,  as  long 
as  the  profits  are  not  too  disproportionately  large, 
or  unless  the  community. is  not  temporarily  at' 
war,  or  in  similar  unusual  conditions.  Organized 
society  at  present  exists,  not  for  the  welfare  of 
all  its  members,  weak  as  well  as  strong,  but  for  the 
welfare  of  the  strong.  The  weak  are  left  to  pros- 
per or  suffer  *as  an  incident  of  the  activities  of 
the  strong.  Aside  from  a  scanty  number,  of  nega- 
tive checks,  it  is  felt  that  the  state  has  no  right 
to  proscribe  the  prosperity  of  the  few  nor  callecl 
upon  to  assure  prosperity  to  the  many. 

Against  this  individualistically  anarchistic  phi- 
losophy, Socialism  sets  firmly  a  social  point  of 
view.  Not  that  a  social  point  of  view  and  -a  social- 
ist point  of  view  are  necessarily  synonymous,  or 
that  a  social  point  of  view  may  not  be  developed 
outside,  or  even  in  opposition  to,  the  Socialist 
point  of  view.  But  the  goal  aimed  at  by  Socialism 


220  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

is  that  of  the  greatest  social  welfare,  and  the 
standards  set  by  Socialism  are  social  standards. 
With  the  advent  of  a  Socialist  state,  these  stand- 
ards would  become  the  reigning  standards  in  the 
economic  field,  and  the  standards  set  by  the  eco- 
nomic activities  are  apt  to  fix  the  standards  of 
most  other  activities.  Conversely,  it  is  probably 
impossible,  or  at  least  supremely  difficult,  to  stimu- 
late society  to  a  social  point  of  view  in  fields  of 
endeavor  outside  of  business,  if  the  business  point 
of  view  is  anti-social.  Even  those  proponents  of 
movements  and  thought  which  are  anti-Socialistic, 
but  which  are  aimed  at  higher  social  welfare, 
would  probably  find  that  the  establishment  of  a 
Socialist  state  would  immeasurably  aid  them  by 
its  general  stimulus  to  most  people  to  begin  to 
think  in  social  terms. 

Thus,  there  are  students  of  our  economic  or- 
ganization who  believe  that  economic  production 
and  distribution  should  be  left  largely  to  private 
initiative  because  otherwise  economic  production 
and  distribution  cannot  be  managed  efficiently. 
These  students  are .  quite  as  socially-minded  as 
the  Socialists.  Their  point  of  view  is  as  much  one 
of  social  welfare  as  is  the  Socialistic  point  of  view. 
They  are  unwilling  to  uproot  the  capitalists '  hold 
on  our  economic  processes,  not  because  of  consid- 
eration for  the  capitalists,  but  because  of  consid- 
eration for  those  economic  processes.  But  under 
such  an  arrangement,  it  would  be  difficult  for  the 


THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM  221 

great  mass  of  people  to  appreciate  that  the  capital- 
ists were  not  maintaining  their  position  because 
of  their  vested  rights  to  profit  at  the  expense  of 
society.  Their  maintenance  of  their  position  be- 
cause of  their  social  service  would  be  recognized 
only  obscurely,  and  the  acquisition  of  a  general 
social  point  of  view  in  all  fields  of  human  endeavor 
would  be  but  slightly  stimulated. 

Not  that  Socialism  can  close  its  eyes  to  the 
danger  that  individualism  may  be  suppressed  or 
discouraged  with  the  development  of .  the  social 
point  of  view  by  the  Cooperative  Commonwealth. 
The  larger  Socialism  recognizes  that  individual- 
ism must  be  tolerated,  even  encouraged;  not  be- 
cause, as  under  Capitalism,  individualism  enjoys 
vested  interests  and  natural  rights,  but'  because  it 
is  to  the  welfare  of  the  whole  that  the  recalcitrant 
single  parts  should  be  allowed  to -present  their 
case.  Thus,  the  conscientious  objector  must  be 
tolerated,  even  in  time  of  actual  military  invasion, 
not  because  he  has  an  inherent  moral  right  to  go 
counter  to  the  will  .of  the  majority  j  but  because 
it  is  for  the  encouragement  of  truth,  and  hence 
ultimately  to  the  benefit  of  the  majority,  that  mi- 
norities'be  allowed  free  rein  to  present  truth  as 
it  appears  to  them.  If  Lloyd  George  had  been  sent 
to  jail  for  twenty  years  for  opposing  his  country's 
prosecution  of  the  Boer  War,  in  all  probability 
Germany  would  have  won  the  World  War. 

Feminism  and  eugenics  have  been  instanced  as 


222  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

two  of  the  developments  sprouting  from  the  foun- 
dation of  the  political  Socialist  state  which  are 
necessary  to  the  realization  of  the  larger  aims  and 
possibilities  of  Socialism.  Now,  the  most  formi- 
dable obstacle  to  the  advancement  of  movements 
such  as  feminism  and  eugenics,  as  to  the  advance- 
ment of  Socialism  itself,  is  psychological.  It  is  the 
reluctance,  indeed,  the  hostility,  of  most  people 
even  to  consider  abandoning  old  concepts  for  new. 
An  excellent  example  of  this  psychological  barrier 
to  progress  is  furnished  by  the  present  agitation 
in  the  United  States  for  a  classless  dissemination 
of  knowledge  concerning  birth  control.  When  its 
proponents  go  before  a  state  legislature  and  plead 
for  the  repeal  of  laws  forbidding  physicians  and 
nurses  to  inform  women  how  to  prevent  the  con- 
ception of  infants  whose  birth  would  be  a  calam- 
ity for  both  infants  and  mothers,  their  logic  is 
unanswerable.  But  their  arguments  beat  futilely 
against  a  stone  wall  of  established  custom  and 
prejudices  which  is  so  thick  that  years  of  ceaseless 
propaganda  and  skilful  organization  are  necessary 
before  their  case  can  get  a  hearing  simply  on  its 
own  merits.  It  required  some  seventy  years  of 
such  effort  to  gain  woman  suffrage ;  and  that  was 
gained,  not  so  much  through  man's  final  willing- 
ness to  consider  a  new  idea  fairly,  as  through  the 
economic  projection  of  women  into  new  fields,  and 
through  the  need  of  women's  economic  help  in  the 
prosecution  of  the  World  War. 


THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM  223 

There  is  not  only  deafness  toward  a  new  idea 
just  because  of  its  newness — there  is  also,  as  so 
convincingly  portrayed  by  Mr.  Galsworthy  in 
"The  Island  Pharisees,"  fierce  anger  against  the 
innovator  for  his  mere  questioning  of  the  old 
ideas.  Unsophisticated  youths  fresh  from  their 
books  or  their  college  halls  expect  disagreement 
with  and. inattention  to  their  "advanced"  creeds; 
but  all  too  many  abandon  their  crusade  because 
they  are  unprepared  for  the  gusts  of  hatred  which 
rake  them  fore  and  aft  for  their  temerity  In  merely 
doubting.  They  are  regarded  not  only  as  enemies, 
but  as  traitors.  In  so  defending  himself  against 
radical  Youth,  the  conservative  is  fond  of  basing 
his  hostility  to  change  on  the  ground  that  the 
status  quo  represents  the  result  of  years  of  long, 
painful  and  illuminating  experience  on  the  part 
of  the  world;  but  he  seldom  can  prove  that  the 
status  quo  has  so  logical  a  raison  d'etre.  The 
status  quo  is  apt  to  be  rather  the  result  of  a 
chance  decision,  which,  when  once  made,  became 
surrounded  by  the  halo  of  custom  and  conven- 
tion. It  is  by  chance,  not  by  experience,  that  our 
telegraph,  telephones,  express  service  and  rail- 
roads were  given  over  to  and  kept  in  private 
hands.  If  chance  had  decreed  otherwise,  most  of 
the  present  resorters  to  the  "mankind's  long  years 
of  experience"  argument  to  oppose  government 
operation  would  just  as  firmly  and  on  the  same 
grounds  oppose  private  operation.  It  took  defeat 


224  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

in  the  greatest  of  all  wars  to  persuade  the  German 
people  to  examine  their  Constitution  on  its  merits ; 
from  present  indications,  the  examination  of  the 
American  Constitution  by  the  American  people  on 
its  merits  belongs  to  the  dim  and  distant  future 
when  the  circle  is  squared  and  perpetual  motion 
is  discovered.  The  fiercest  expounders  of  the  doc- 
trine that  the  American  Constitution  was  directly 
inspired  of  God  were  the  fiercest  denouncers  of 
the  German  people  for  being  so  ridiculous  as  to 
suppose  that  God,  the  only  true  God,  would  choose 
any  one  people  as  the  object  of  his  favors.  It 
requires  much  inner  wrestling  with  scepticism 
before  one -can  persuade  oneself  that  this  type  of 
mind,  if  by  chance  born  and  dwelling  in  Germany 
in  1914,  would  not  have  vociferously  joined  the 
"Gott  mit  uns"  chant  until  the  Second  Battle  of 
the  Marne. 

Perhaps  the  day  is  not  remote  when  the  biolo- 
gists and  psychologists  will  explain  in  full  and  final 
detail  why  the  mind  so  works  that  it  derives  pleas- 
ure from  rehearsing  an  idea  to  which  it  has  be- 
come accustomed,  and  extreme  displeasure  at  the 
effort  called  forth  to  permit  a  new  idea  to  plough 
an  unblazed  trail  through  the  mind's  cells.  At 
present,  only  the  fact  itself  can  be  recorded. 
Doubtless,  the  mind  will  ever  be  friendly  to  old 
ideas  and. hostile  to  new,  unless  most  conscien- 
tiously disciplined.  Also,  the  minds  in  power  will 
particularly  so  tend  because  they  will  generally  be 


THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM  225 

the  older  minds,  and,  other  things  being  equal,  the 
older  minds  will  be  less  receptive  to  novelty  than 
the  younger.  At  all  events,  conservatism  will 
probably  always  have  the  advantage  in  strength 
and  position,  and  radicalism  or  mere  progressiv- 
ism  or  liberalism  *be  always  under  a  handicap. 
The  rare  exception  will  occur  when  countries  like 
Revolutionary  Eussia  in  March,  1917,  start  on 
their  career  with  a  practically  clean  slate ;  and  as 
letters  and  figures  and  drawings  begin  to  appear 
on  the  slate,  the  old  pro-old  and  anti-new  trend 
will  reassert  itself.  Society  under  the .  larger 
Socialism  thus  must  consciously  provide  every  en- 
couragement for  radical  thought,  consciously  con- 
ceiving itself  in  duty  bound  to  prepare  the  soil  for 
new  doctrines,  and  consciously  recognizing  that  its 
preference  for  the  old  concepts  may  be  but  preju- 
dice. •  . 

But  if  the  Socialism  which  comes  into  its  own 
with  the  advent  of  a  Socialist  state  should  be  the 
deductive  and  didactic  Marxism  deriving  from 
formulas  of  the  past,  most  progressive  non-sccial- 
ist  movements  will  have  as  hard  a  row  to  hoe 
under  Socialism  as  under  capitalism.  The  mind 
which  believes  that  spiritual  and"  political  truth 
was  once  for  all  time  expounded  by  the  Bible  and 
the  Constitution  is  no  more  a  closed  mind  than  the 
mind  which  believes  that  economic  truth  was  once 
for  all  time  expounded  by 'the  Commimist  Mani- 
festo and  Capital.  True,  at  the  present  time  even 


226  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

Marxian  American  Socialists  are  receptive  to  in- 
novations, such  as  the  programs  of  feminism  and 
eugenics;  but  they  are  thus  receptive  .largely  be- 
cause their  Socialism,  being  still  severely  unsuc- 
cessful, has  all  the  trappings  of  a  radical  move- 
ment, so  that  its  supporters  are  still  inclined  to 
embrace  most  other  radical  movements.  But  let 
the  Marxian  Socialists  once  become  successful,  and 
Marxian  Socialism  become  the  established  order, 
and  then  well  may  new  radical  movements  beware ! 
Of  course,  those  other  older  radical  movements 
which  had  been  advocated  by  the  Marxians  in  their 
own  days  of  struggle,  such,  doubtless,  as  feminism 
and  eugenics,  will  remain  in  good  standing,  be- 
cause of  the  earlier  affiliations  and  allegiances. 
But  new  radical  non-Socialist  movements  arising 
after  the  success  of  a  Socialism  drawing  its  inspi- 
ration primarily  from  deductions  of  the  past  will 
find  themselves  Confronted  by  a  trenchant  preju- 
dice against  any  other  deductions  not  also  derived 
from  the  Word  and  the  Law. 

The  present  prejudice  against  innovation  ex- 
presses "itself  in  the  state  of  mind  which  is  called 
''intolerant"  by  those  who  have  schooled  them- 
selves to  be  receptive  tpward  innovation.  Now, 
the  difference  between  the  tolerant  mind  and  the 
intolerant  mind  is  due  chiefly  to  the  former's  un- 
derstanding that  the  truth  has  not  yet  been  com- 
pletely exposed  beyond  amendment  or  addition; 
and  to  the  latter 's  conviction  that  the  truth,  the 


THE  LAEGER  SOCIALISM  227 

whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth  has  been 
already  revealed,  so  that  iconoclasm  against  the 
revelation  must  be  false  and  wicked.  Intolerance 
toward  the  I.W.W.,  the  pacifist,  the  prostitute, 
the  atheist  can  be  understood  and  explained  only 
by  the  assurance  that  there  is  not  even  the  slight- 
est possibility  that  they  can  be  right  in  their 
courses.  Indeed,  if  capitalism,  militarism,  chastity 
and  Deism  are  as  eternally  and  self -evidently  true 
as  the  Chambers  of  Commerce,  the  one  hundred 
per  cent  Americans,  the  anti-vice  societies  and  the 
evangelists  believe  them,  to  be,  then  the  treat- 
ment meted  out  to  the  I.W.W.,  the  pacifists,  the 
prostitutes  and  the  atheists  is  justified.  If  one 
were  compelled  to  choose  a  single  gauge  by  which 
to  measure  the  virtue  of  a  civilization,  most  of  us 
would  probably  choose  tolerance. 

This  is  all  elemental  enough,  but  if  it  is  disre- 
garded by  the  Socialist  movement,  the  Socialist 
state  will  present  to  the  world  a  civilization  but 
slightly  preferable  to  that  which  it  supplanted, 
and  certainly  not  in  conformity  with  the  roseate 
hopes  for  a  purer  social  order  held  and  held  out 
by  most  Socialists.  If  Socialism  arrives  in  the 
spirit  of  the  old  deductive,  dogmatic,  special  dis- 
pensation Marxism,  and  not  largely  in  the  spirit 
of  what  is  here  termed  the  larger  Socialism,  it 
will  necessarily  prove  itself  as  intolerant  toward 
new  ideas  in  violation  of  its  own  as  Capitalism  has 
proved  itself. 


228  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

For  instance,  how  will  the  Socialist  state  con- 
duct the  schools?  Will  it  continue  the  present- 
day  methods  by  which  hard-and-fast  formulas  are 
fastened  upon  the  child's  mind;  or  will  it  present 
standards  of  conduct  as  evolutionary,  and  current 
values  as  relative?  Will  it  suppress  all  undermin- 
ing criticism  of  Socialism  in  the  public  schools  as 
ruthlessly  as  capitalism  suppresses  all  fair  con- 
sideration of  Socialism  today,  and  as  ruthlessly  as 
we  have  been  told  that  Soviet  Russia  suppresses 
hostile  criticism  of  the  principles  of  Bolshevism? 
If  it  will,  it  will  be  prostituting. its  promise.  For 
much  of  the  intolerance  of  our  present  system  of 
society  has  been  deliberately  inculcated  by  the 
finality  with  which  concepts  have  been  foisted  on 
most  of  us  in  the  lower  schools.  Herein  lies  an- 
other reason  why  Youth  is  unable  to  carry  on  for 
his  earlier  resolutions  after  leaving  the  world  of 
books  and  school-teachers.  He  has  been  taught 
thiet  the  good  is  wholly  good  and  the  evil  wholly 
evil,  that  the  issues  by  which  he  will  be  confronted 
are  palpably  all  white  or  all  black;  and  he  is  first 
confused  and  then  discouraged  as  he  gropes  his 
way  through  this  gray  and  brown  world  of 
partly  and  obscurely  good  and  partly  and  debat- 
ably  evil.  The  larger  Socialism  would  conscien- 
tiously present  its  education  as  an  efficient  medi- 
cal school  today  presents  the  study  of  medicine. 
Medical  students  are  given  current  findings  in 
medicine  largely  from  an  evolutionary  point  of 


THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM  229 

view ;  they  are  shown  how  the  accepted  treatment 
of  today  was  not  the  accepted  treatment  of  yester- 
day, and  are  warned  that  it  well  may  not  be  the 
accepted  treatment  of  tomorrow.  They  are  hence 
taught  to  be  as  receptive  to  new  theories  and  new 
practises  in  medicine  as  it  is  possible  for  naturally 
conservative  humans  to  be;  and  in  like  manner  the 
larger  Socialism,  an  evolutionary  and  not  a  de- 
terminist  growth,  would  strive  to  inculcate  the 
receptive  state  of  mind  in  its  school-children. 

Again,  the  larger  Socialism  would  insist  that 
the  standards  sketched  even  thus  tentatively  in  its 
schools  be  applied  to  contemporaneous  problems, 
and  not  allowed  to  atrophy  in  the  pupil's  mind 
through  lack  of  employment.  Under  our  present 
educational  methods,  the  student's  understanding 
of  the  problems  of  life  is  as  effective  as  would  be 
his  understanding  of  arithmetic  if  he  were  taught 
the  multiplication  table,  but  never  induced  to  ap- 
ply it  to  concrete  arithmetical  problems.  The 
world  of  the  school-room  and  the  world  outside  the 
school-room  are  rigidly  quarantined  against  each 
other,  v  The  standards  taught  and  the  conduct  prac- 
tised in  the  one  world  are  seldom  integrated  with 
the  standards  and  conduct  of  the  other.  Thus  we 
develop  a  type  of  mind  which  strenuously  insists 
that  the  American  colonies  had  every  right  to  free 
themselves  from  English  rule,  at  the  same  time 
that  it  is  either  apathetic  or  hostile  to  Ireland's 
struggle  to  free  itself  from  British  rule.  So  far 


230  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

as  appreciation  of  our  contemporaneous  radicals 
and  non-conformists  is  concerned,  our  school-chil- 
dren might  never  have  been  taught  that  most  of 
the  noteworthy  figures  of  the  past  were  the  radi- 
cals and  non-conformists  of  their  generations. 
That  it  was  glorious  to  be  more  advanced  than 
one 's  age  in  the  past  they  are  taught  so  inapplica- 
bly  that  they  seem  never  to  surmise  that  it  might 
be  glorious  also  to  be  ahead  of  one's  own  age 
in  the  present. 


Socialism  in  this  larger  sense  is  thus  primarily 
concerned  with  the  kind  of  man  produced  under  a 
socialistic  instead  of  under  a  capitalistic  order  of 
society,  rather  than  merely  with  the  material  con- 
trast between  those  orders.  From  this  viewpoint, 
its  indictment  of  our  present  civilization  for  un- 
necessary lack  of  leisure  for  the  great  mass  of 
people  is  severer  than  its  indictment  for  undue 
lack  of  physical  well-being,  as  evidenced  by  un- 
necessarily low  wages.  The  validity  of  this  eval- 
uation is  indicated  by  the  fact  that  in  our  recent 
burst  of  prosperity  large  numbers  of  the  work- 
ers, even  allowing  for  capitalistic  anxiety  to  make 
out  a  case  against  Labor,  seem  to  have  preferred 
to  support  themselves  comfortably  on  four  days' 
work  per  week,  rather  than  enjoy  luxuries  as  a 
result  of  six  days '  work  per  week,  especially  when 
the  work  was  monotonous  or  laborious.  And  in 


THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM  231 

the  program  for  a  Socialist  state,  if  it  should 
prove  impossible,  particularly  in  the  early  years, 
to  grant  to  the  workers  an  altogether  socially  de- 
sirable scale  in  both  wages  and  in  hours  of  toil, 
the  larger  Socialism  would  reduce  the  hours  of 
toil  rather  than  increase  wages — always  provid- 
ing that  production  is  sufficiently  high  so  that  the 
hours  of  toil  can  be  lowered  without  cutting  pro- 
duction to  the  danger  point,  and  providing  that 
the  wages  already  being  paid  are  sufficient  to  pro- 
vide the  necessities  of  life. 

The  larger  Socialism  would  make  that  decision 
largely  with  the  view  of  affording  every  possible 
facility  for  greater  numbers  to  come  into  contact 
with  the  inspiring  or  clarifying  type  of  books,  art, 
music,  speeches,  meetings,  and  even  sermons.  For 
it  is  the  present  lack  of  contact  of  the  great  ma- 
jority of  people  with  the  written  or  spoken  in- 
spiration driving  most  of  the  intellectuals,  radi- 
cals and  idealists  forward  which  accounts  for 
much  of  the  present  all-too-apparent  hold  of 
sophistry,  prejudice,  conservatism  and  crass  ma- 
terialism and  self-seeking  upon  popular  opinion 
and  action.  The  intellectuals,  radicals  and  ideal- 
ists are  prone  to  be  cast  down  that  their  new  pro- 
grams and  ethical  appeals  seem  so  uniformly  and 
decisively  rejected  of  men.  But  they  are  so  re- 
jected very  largely  because  to  those  with  whom 
the  ultimate  rejection  or  acceptance  lies,  the 
stimuli  which  animated  the  intellectuals,  Social- 


232  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

ists  and  idealists  are  generally  unable  to  gain  ac- 
cess.  Not  only  does  the  length  of  absorption  re- 
quired today  in  modern  industry  and  business,  for 
employer  as  well  as  for  employee,  afford  little 
leisure  for  thought  and  mental  exhilaration;  but 
also  the  intensity  of  the  personal  effort  required 
is  apt  to  exhaust  the  mind  to  the  point  where 
thought  and  mental  exhilaration  can  make  no  im- 
pression, even  if  occasionally  the  sheer  leisure  for 
them  should  be  available.  It  is  reported  of  Brown- 
ing that  every  morning  before  beginning  his  day's 
composition  he  would  read  some  pages  of  Shake- 
speare, in  order  to  transport  himself  into  the  rare- 
fied atmosphere.  Similarly,  the  atmosphere  in 
which  the  intellectuals,  Socialists  and  idealists 
move  has  been  created  largely  from  outside  inspi- 
ration. For  the  success  of  their  causes,  the  daily 
lives  of  most  of  us  must  also  be  so  ordered  as  to 
bar  that  inspiration  from  taking  hold  of  our  minds 
only  by  the  degree  to  which  those  minds  are  in- 
herently impervious  to  it. 

Thus,  the  Socialist  roused  to  a  white  heat  of 
indignation  and  high  resolve  in  the  protest-meet- 
ing is  generally  unappreciative  of  the  fact  that 
probably  the  great  majority  of  his  fellowmen  have 
seldom  dwelled  in  the  protest-meeting  atmos- 
phere, except  possibly  during  Liberty  Loan  drives. 
Upon  the  busy  outside  world  which  has  no  time 
for  protest-meetings,  he  fails  to  impress  his  gen- 
erous impulses  because  the  outside  world  can- 


THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM  233 

not  appreciate  nor  understand  them  apart  from 
the  atmosphere  in  which  they  are  conceived. 
And  perhaps  the  arch-consummation  of  the  Social- 
ist state  would  be  the  extension  of  the  atmosphere 
of  the  protest-meeting  and  even  the  soap-box  ex- 
hortation until  it  became  the  atmosphere  in  which 
most  of  us  received  our  stimulation,  acquired  our 
fundamental  conceptions,  made  our  effective  re- 
solves. The  reports  which  have  come  out  of 
Soviet  Eussia  indicate  that  such  an  atmosphere 
has  been  prevailing  in  Moscow,  for  instance,  to 
the  extent  that  it  has  not  been  literally  smothered 
by  cold,  disease  and  malnutrition.  If  that  atmos- 
phere has  managed  to  keep  alive,  even  to  strength- 
en, the  influence  of  the  more  inspiring  books, 
pamphlets,  dramas,  music,  art  and  addresses  in 
that  hapless  land,  where  material  sufferings  might 
well  have  been  expected  to  still  all  impulses  ex- 
cept those  of  obtaining  surcease  from  want,  surely 
it  holds  vast  possibilities  of  rejuvenating  eco- 
nomically more  fortunate  lands. 

Doubtless,  it  must  be  confessed  that,  even  with 
full  leisure  and  mental  opportunity  to  dwell  under 
the  influence  of  the  more  ennobling  stimuli  of  life, 
many  persons,  perhaps  even  the  majority,  will 
prove  to  be  still  either  antagonistic  or  apathetic  to 
them.v  But  beyond  the  limitations  set  by  the  old 
Adam,  even  the  larger  Socialism  does  not  pretend 
to  be  able  to  go.  Its  possibilities  will  have  been 
realized  when  the  factors  working  against  the  old 


234  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

Adam's  limitations  upon  human  progress  shall 
have  come  into  their  own,  and  shall  have  been 
vouchsafed  full  scope  for  their  power.  Doubtless, 
also,  permeation  of  the  social  milieu  by  the  pro- 
test-meeting atmosphere  will  have  a  baneful  effect 
upon  the  individual's  productive  efficiency.  If 
that  be  the  case,  Socialism  from  this  larger  point 
of  view  will  be  deliberately  preferring  comfort 
with  leisure  to  luxury  without  leisure.  For  the 
man  who  can  listen,  with  ears  keenly  attuned,  to 
the  still,  small  music  of  the  inspirational  forces  of 
the  ages  and  of  his  own  era,  and  at  the  same  time 
can  wade  lustily  and  effectively  into  the  concrete 
business  problems  of  the  twentieth  century,  with 
each  of  these  sides  of  his  nature  complementing 
rather  than  hampering  the  other,  that  man  is  so 
rare  as  fittingly  to  deserve  the  appellation  of 
" genius."  Bather,  the  mind  easily  and  fervently 
aroused  to  enthusiasm  is  apt  to  be  the  mind  with 
a  feeble  grasp  upon  the  concrete  realities  and  prob- 
lems of  the  factory  and  the  workshops.  Converse- 
ly, even  a  firm  grip  upon  the  realities  of  material 
business  problems  is  apt  to  be  loosened  when  the 
mind  finds  itself  constantly  assailed  by  inspiration 
from  the  world  of  books,  music,  drama,  religion  or 
intellectual  devotion.  It  seems  not  to  be  the  same 
world  as  that  of  our  mundane  everyday  business 
efforts. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  broadening  of  the  world 
of  books  and  art  into  more  general  popular  ap- 


THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM  235 

peal  may  well  have  the  effect  of  closing  the  gap 
between  that  world  and  the  world  of  our  everyday 
mundane  efforts  and  routine  experiences.  At  the 
present  time,  the  world  of  books  and  art  is  ruled 
largely  by  the  upper  intellectual  classes.  At  least, 
the  standards  in  that  world  are  set  by  those 
classes.  Now,  the  upper  intellectual  classes  are 
composed  to  a  very  large  extent  of  those  whose 
economic  position  is  secure,  of  those  who  live  by 
intellectual  work,  or  of  those  who  fall  within  both 
categories.  As  a  rule,  the  inspiration  they  de- 
rive from  books  and  art  is  not  immediately  and 
without  paraphrase  transferred  into  actual  deeds 
of  the  everyday  world.  Therefore,  the  kind  of 
action  portrayed  in  the  works  which  are  ranked 
highest  according  to  present  literary  standards  is 
often,  if  not  usually,  the  kind  of  action  which 
would  be  ranked  lowest  in  the  world  of  actual  ex- 
perience. Good  example  is  furnished  by  Brown- 
ing's dazzlingly  brilliant  Porphyries  Lover.  By 
all  present  literary  standards,  this  poem  of  sixty 
lines  must  be  ranked  as  nothing  short  of  a  master- 
piece. Yet  in  the  actual  world  of  action,  the  deed 
it  so  glowingly  celebrates  must  be  classed  as  sheer 
homicide,  and  the  character  who  reveals  himself  so 
sympathetically  in  the  dramatic  monologue  must 
be  punished  as  a  mere  criminal.  I  am  not  sug- 
gesting that  this  type  of  literature  now  dear  to  the 
intellectual  and  aesthetic  aristocracy  must  be 
abandoned  or  frowned  upon  in  the  days  when 


236  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

opportunities  for  literary  appreciation  are  greatly 
broadened,  largely  through  leisure.  All  that  is 
being  suggested  is  that  in  those  days  the  literary 
standards  may  be  set  by  a  much  wider  number 
and  class  of  judges  than  at  present,  even  with 
some  semblance  of  democratic  procedure  in  the 
evaluation  of  literature ;  and  that  the  literary  pro- 
ductions which  accordingly  will  gain  the  highest 
accepted  applause  will  be  those  whose  stimuli  are 
directly  applicable  to  the  actual  problems  of  mod- 
ern highly  organized  life,  not  merely  to  aesthetic 
enjoyment.  Even  in  the  field  of  literature,  service 
in  terms  of  action  may  become  the  gauge  of  great- 
ness, instead  of  our  present  individualistic  and  un- 
pragmatic  gauge. 

But  Socialism's  indictment  against  the  capitalist 
system's  influence  over  the  character  of  man  rests 
not  alone,  and  not  fundamentally,  upon  man's  lack 
of  leisure  under  capitalism  to  attune  himself  as 
far  as  may  be  to  the  more  inspiring  forces  of  the 
universe  and  products  of  his  fellowman.  The 
basic  Socialist  indictment  of  Capitalism  rests  upon 
Capitalism's  economic  discouragement  of  service 
by  the  individual  to  society.  Conversely,  it  is 
the  basic  virtue  of  a  Socialist  system  of  society 
that  it  would  hold  out  the  highest  rewards  to  those 
who  served  mankind  most  bountifully,  and  would 
strive  to  discountenance  the  anti-social  economic 
effort.  It  is  only  necessary  to  observe  -the  am- 


THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM  237 

bitions  of  youths  before  and  after  entering  the 
business  world  today  to  recognize  the  antithesis 
between  the  conduct  rewarded  most  highly  under 
capitalism  and  the  conduct  previously  mapped  out 
for  themselves  by  the  more  ambitious  and  the  finer 
among  such  youths.  Even  those  who  seem  well 
broken  to  the  capitalistic  harness  before  strap- 
ping it  on  themselves  have  usually  been  previously 
permeated,  through  their  social  and  family  con- 
nections, by  the  capitalistic  standards  of  worldly 
prowess.  w  True,  they  will  find  that  under  capital- 
ism the  qualities  of  individual  honesty,  frankness, 
sincerity,  truthfulness  and  reliability  are  at  a 
premium ;  but  it  is  in  the  social  effect  of  our  busi- 
ness efforts  that  the  capitalist  system  persistently 
lowers  youth  to  and  keeps  man  at  a  lower  social 
level  of  character  than  even  imperfect  human 
nature  warrants. 

For  the  acquisition  of  wealth  under  capitalism 
derives  usually  from  profiting  at  the  expense  of 
one's  fellowmen.  It  is  not  necessary  to  deny  the 
existence  of  striking  exceptions  to  this  statement 
in  order  to  insist  upon  its  general  validity.  The 
exceptions  occur  usually  in  the  professions,  such 
as  medicine,  teaching  or,  perhaps,  social  service; 
in  the  arts,  and  occasionally  in  the  sciences.  Only 
rarely  do  the  exceptions  occur  in  business,  as  when 
the  safety  razor  or  the  Ford  automobile  or  a  new 
invention  is  perfected.  But  a  civilization  in  the 
twentieth  century  takes  its  tone  from  its  normal 


238  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

business,  rather  than  from  its  professions,  its  arts, 
its  science  or  its  unique  business  forms.  The 
wealthy  man  under  capitalism,  as  a  rule,  is  ne  who 
has  utilized  to  his  own  advantage  the  current-eco- 
nomic system  of  producing  and  distributing  goods. 
Any  benefit  which  may  accrue  to  society  from  his 
efforts  accrues  only  incidentally,  if  at  all. 

And  the  acquisition  of  wealth,  or  the  manifesta- 
tion of  large  income,  is  the  standard  by  which  the 
great  mass  of  the  people  gauge  success.  The  in- 
tellectuals and  the  Socialists,  who  pay  their  tribute 
for  personal  success  to  intellectual,  social  service, 
scientific  or  artistic  achievement,  may  recognize, 
even  may  recognize  freely,  the  deference  paid  to 
wealth  by  the  non-intellectual  majority.  But  a 
book-reader  or  -writer,  no  matter  how  generously 
he  may  attempt  to  recognize  that  wealth  and  in- 
come provide  the  measure  by  which  individuals 
and  their  careers  are  judged  by  most  people,  is 
still  apt  to  be  under  the  illusion  that  the  sort  of 
achievement  which  he  praises  has  a  firmer  hold  on 
the  general  populace  than  it  actually  has.  Amer- 
ica toadies  to  monetary  achievement  hardly  less 
supinely  than  pre-war  Germany  toadied  to  mili- 
tary achievement.  It  is  by  no  means  the  bell-hop 
and  the  waiter  and  Pullman  porter  alone  whose 
conduct  toward  a  stranger  is  guided  by  the  amount 
of  wealth  his  apparel  connotes.  The  essential 
thing  about  a  man,  in  the  mind  of  Brooklyn,  Mont- 
clair,  Adams  County,  Marion,  Main  Street,  Spoon 


THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM  239 

Eiver,  and  Winesburg,  Ohio,  is  his  income.  The 
intensity  of  their  interest  in  how  much  Jones  is 
worth,  and  if  his  daughter  is  " doing  well"  when 
ishe  is  betrothed,  can  hardly  be  exaggerated.  All 
the  power  of  social  adulation  is  exerted  to  drive 
the  modern  man  to  get  the  better  of  society  by 
deriving  great  wealth  from  it,  and  the  modern 
woman  to  marry  such  a  man;  all  the  power  of 
social  rejection  is  exerted  to  prevent  the  modern 
man  from  choosing  the  ways  which  benefit  soci- 
ety, but  which  lead  to  small  income,  and  the 
modern  woman  from  joining  her  life  to  that  type. 
So  long  as  modern  business  is  conducted  primarily 
for  the  individual  business  man's  profit;  so  long 
as  the  average  individual  business  man  gains  the 
highest  profit  by  exploiting  his  consumers,  his 
workmen,  his  competitors  and  the  other  businesses 
which  serve  his  own;  so  long  as  he  gains  the 
least  profit  by  being  generous  to  the  consumers, 
to  his  workmen,  to  his  competitors  and  to  the 
other  businesses  which  dovetail  into  his,  so  long 
is  he  under  pressure  which  makes  well-nigh  im- 
possible any  great  faithfulness  to  ideals  of  liv- 
ing by  serving  his  fellowman,  and  which  makes 
well-nigh  inevitable  his  frank  or  concealed  adher- 
ence to  the  principle  of  serving  himself  at  the  ex- 
pense of  others.  By  its  very  essence,  capitalism 
denies  the  validity  of  the  higher  ideals  to  which 
the  church,  literature  and  certain  racially  pre- 
servative instincts  call  us  for  homage,  which  cap- 


240  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

ture  our  imagination,  and  which  hold  our  alle- 
giance. By  its  practises,  capitalism  supplants 
these  ideals  by  courses  of  conduct  which  have  only 
to  be  stated  in  the  abstract  to  be  condemned  of  us 
as  unworthy  of  worship. 

This  indictment  does  not  close  its  eyes  to  the 
inevitability,  or  even  to  the  possible  desirability, 
under  any  modern  system  of  society,  of  gauging 
men's  value  by  their  monetary  achievements. 
Man  seems  as  incurably  disposed  to  judge  and 
evaluate  his  fellows  as  he  is  disposed  to  act  so  as 
to  gain  the  commendation  and  to  shun  the  con- 
demnation of  his  fellows.  And  in  modern  complex 
society,  doubtless  size  of  income  is  the  only  gen- 
erally available  measure  of  personal  evaluation, 
replacing  the  number  of  scalps  of  the  Indians,  the 
titles  of  nobility  of  S9me  lands,  the  military  rank 
of  militarist  nations.  But  under  a  Socialist  sys- 
tem— and  herein  lies  the  supreme  superiority  of 
Socialism  to  Capitalism— the  highest  monetary 
rewards  will  appertain  to  the  work  which  most 
highly  benefits  the  community.  With  practically 
all  men  working  for  the  state,  that  is,  working  for 
their  fellows;  and  with  the  state  apportioning 
salaries  according  to  the  value,  difficulty  and  re- 
sponsibility of  the  work  performed,  the  greatest 
monetary  reputation  will  accord  to  those  who 
prove  themselves  most  indispensable  to  the  state, 
that  is,  to  their  fellows.  The  measure  of  the  in- 
dividual's prow/ess ;  the  adulation,  or  perhaps  even 


THE  LAEGER  SOCIALISM  241 

the  envy,  lie  will  inspire  in  the  breasts  of  his  as- 
sociates; his  social  status,  will  vary  proportion- 
ately, and  no  longer  inversely,  to  his  value  to  his 
fellowmen.  Society  will  reward  those  best  who 
serve  it  best,  will  penalize  most  severely  those  who 
serve  it  least  effectively.  Society  will  exert  most 
of  its  pressure  of  praise  and  dispraise  in  har- 
mony with,  no  longer  in  opposition  to,  whatever 
social  and  altruistic  impulses  exist  within  the 
hearts  of  its  members.  Each  of  us  will  receive 
outside  stimulation  to  serve  our  fellows  well,  for 
therein  will  lie  our  best  opportunity  for  personal 
advancement. 

Such  a  system  of  reward  for  socially-service- 
able conduct  and  of  penalty  for  socially-harmful 
conduct  provides  the  answer  to  those  who  loosely 
dismiss  the  Socialist  program  on  the  ground  that 
it  underestimates  the  need  for  personal  stimula- 
tion by  the  opportunity  for  personal  profit.  This 
citing  of  Marxian  materialism  by  the  capitalist 
for  his  own  purposes  has  been  frequently  and  con- 
clusively proved  to  be  unjustified,  in  view  of  the 
many  other  impulses  from  within  and  without  the 
individual  which  drive  men  forward  to  their  best 
efforts.  At  all  events,  this  point  of  capitalistic 
attack  is  manifestly  directed  at  absolutist  com- 
munism or  at  certain  -forms  of  philosophic  anarch- 
ism, rather  than  at  Socialism.  For  'the  Socialist 
program  provides  that  economic  reward  should 
stimulate  all  in  tbe  community  to  their  best  ef- 


242  THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM 

forts  as  strongly  as  under  capitalism,  but  with 
the  stimulus  turned  in  a  different  direction.  If 
the  defenders  of  the  capitalist  system  object  that 
the  highest  stimuli  under  Socialism  might  be 
lower,  and  considerably  lower,  in  amount  than  the 
highest  stimuli  under  Capitalism,  the  answer  is 
that  the  Socialist  state  will  have  to  raise  its  high- 
est stimuli  to  the  limit  necessary  to  summon  the 
most  enthusiastic  work  of  the  most  capable  admin- 
istrators. Moreover,  the  desire  for  expenditure  is 
to  a  great  extent  competitive;  among  the  higher 
incomes,  expenditure  is  guided  largely  by  demands 
of  one's  social  class  rather  than  by  impulses  and 
desires  springing  wholly,  and  without  artificial 
stimulation,  from  within  the  individual. 

Naturally,  along  with  this  payment  of  the  higher 
remuneration  for  the  more  valuable  service  would 
proceed  devastating  inheritance  taxes.  It  would 
be  impossible  for  a  family  to  dwell  #t  ease  in 
Zion  for  generations  by  means  of  whatever  wealth 
might  have  been  accumulated,  even  in  a  Socialist 
state,  by  the  abilities  of  an  ancestor.  True,  there 
are  keen  students  of  our  social  structure,  such  as 
Professor  McDougall,  who  defend  the  institu- 
tion of  the  hereditary  succession  to  nobility  in 
England,  for  instance,  on  the  ground  that  in  both 
theory  and  practise  it  personifies  Noblesse  Oblige, 
and  hence  makes  possible  the  acceptance  by  the 
whole  community  of  the  high  standards  of  the 
community's  highest  caste.  To  this  point  of  view, 


THE  LARGER  SOCIALISM  243 

the  Socialist  is  sympathetic.  His  program  also 
calls  for  the  sovereignty  of  a  class  that  guides  the 
community;  but  the  system  of  caste  under  Social- 
ism would  be  based  on  service.  By  their  sheer  in" 
ability  to  keep  up  to  the  standard  set,  the  unfit 
would  drop  out ;  by  the  workings  of  heredity,  there 
should  nevertheless  still  be  comparative  stability 
in  the  ranks  of  the  class  which  served  the  com- 
munity most  valuably  from  one  generation  to  the 
next ;  the  deference  paid  those  of  first  rank  in  the 
state  would  be  based  on  an  appreciation  of  their 
value  to  those  from  whom  the  deference  came, 
rather  than  merely  on  the  accident  of  birth;  and 
from  the  organization  of  our  society  as  well  as 
from  whatever  socializing  impulses  lay  within  us, 
our  guiding  thought  in  functioning  as  members  of 
society  would  be  the  highest  welfare  of  that  so- 
ciety. 


FEINTED    IN    THE    UNITED    STATES    OF    AMERICA 


Date  Due 


JWAY  1  : 

1981 

APR  1 

51962 

MAK  2 

2  1962 

JAN  I 

4  1963 

DEC   1 

8  1962 

JAN  1  i>    i 

365 

65 

MAY   °  8 

1965 

:HAY29' 

965  <* 

^  ?  ;7  2  o 

1967 

K-^>  ^ 

36/3 

MAR  21 

f967 

MAR  17 

1967  ft 

Library  Bureau  Cat.  No.  1137 

UC  SOUTHERN  REGION' 


A     001068454     6 


